Hello Con,

I just completed this lab. I agree with your auto-cost findings. I just did
1000 since it worked. There was no requirement for it be as low as possible.

For 2.2, you are right. ISIS still allows a router to become DIS with a
priority of 0.

I agree with your 8.2 solution, I used qos-group. If we needed to prioritize
this traffic throughout the network, than EXP would be needed.

For my solution to 6.5 I used "bgp default local-preference" on R5 and R2.
This set the values appropriately and I don't see any issues.

On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Con Spathas <[email protected]>wrote:

> Gday Group,
>
> Well I spent the morning going through the second lab in Vol2. Not too
> bad - although I admit not as challenging as Lab1.
>
> ###################
> A couple of questions. Granted there are usually more than 1 way to do
> things - although I'd like feedback on whether I "broke" the
> requirements.
>
> 1. Task 1.4
> One of the requirements was the configure a P2P connection between R3
> and R7 (Frame-Relay) but not use sub-interfaces.
> I took this to mean a PPP Virtual-Template - but the PG shows a simple
> frame-map statement under the physical interface. I don't think I
> broke any further requirements. Thoughts?
>
> 2. Task 2.4
> 2.4 in the PG sets the reference cost to 155 but even this won't be
> enough to prefer ATM over F0/0 from what I could see.
>
> Here's the reference bandwidth at 155:
> 1.2.3.4/24 is the F0/0 interface
> 200.6.78.7/24 is the ATM1/0.1 interface
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> R6#sh int f0/0 | inc Internet|BW
>  Internet address is 1.2.3.4/24
>  MTU 1500 bytes, BW 100000 Kbit/sec, DLY 100 usec,
> R6#
> R6#sh int a1/0.1 | inc Internet|BW
>  Internet address is 200.6.78.6/24
>  MTU 4470 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit/sec, DLY 80 usec,
> R6#
> R6#sh ip ospf inter | inc Add|Cost
>  Internet Address 200.200.200.6/32, Area 0
>  Process ID 1, Router ID 200.200.200.6, Network Type LOOPBACK, Cost: 1
>  Internet Address 1.2.3.4/24, Area 0
>  Process ID 1, Router ID 200.200.200.6, Network Type BROADCAST, Cost: 1
>  Internet Address 200.6.78.6/24, Area 0
>  Process ID 1, Router ID 200.200.200.6, Network Type BROADCAST, Cost: 1
> R6#
> R6#sh run | inc router ospf |reference
> router ospf 1
>  auto-cost reference-bandwidth 155
> R6#
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Here's the reference bandwidth at 200 which is the smallest I could
> find to make it
>  prefer ATM over FastEthernet:
>
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> R6#sh ip ospf inter | inc Add|Cost
>  Internet Address 200.200.200.6/32, Area 0
>  Process ID 1, Router ID 200.200.200.6, Network Type LOOPBACK, Cost: 1
>  Internet Address 1.2.3.4/24, Area 0
>  Process ID 1, Router ID 200.200.200.6, Network Type BROADCAST, Cost: 2
>  Internet Address 200.6.78.6/24, Area 0
>  Process ID 1, Router ID 200.200.200.6, Network Type BROADCAST, Cost: 1
> R6#
> R6#sh run | inc router ospf |reference
> router ospf 1
>  auto-cost reference-bandwidth 200
> R6#
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> So my solution used reference bandwidth of 200 which I think satisfies
> the requirement given the language of the task.
>
> 3. Task 8.2
> The solution is using ACL to match ICMP and then matching the ACL in
> class-map. I just used nbar and match protocol ICMP instead. I figure
> this is fine.
> The solution also imposed mpls EXP 3 on the policy inbound from the
> VPN routers. I set a qos-group and then matched this going into the SP
> cloud and applied LLQ that way. Again I figure this is okay as it
> achieves the task.
>
> #########################
> A couple of observations.
> 1. Task 2.2
> The task states that R2 and R5 should "never" become DIS, however
> setting their priority will not stop this - just make it less likely!
> Was this intended to test the candidates knowledge of ISIS to not go
> looking for something that's not there?
>
> 2. Task 2.4
> The task states that R6 should never be the DR and ensure R8 is the
> BDR. The PG changes R6 priority to 0 and R8 to priority 2. I set R7 to
> 255 and R8 to 254.
> The PG output shows R7 as the DR but with a priority of 1 - so on a
> reload - i think the task would break as it's shown in the PG and
> final-configs.
>
> 3. Task 6.8 - This isn't so much about the task now - but my understanding.
> In earlier tasks we configured some inbound route-map to set
> local-pref on R2, R5 and I also used weight on R2 and R6 to satisfy
> requirements.
> I've read about this command (match mpls-label)
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/command/reference/mp_m1.html#wp1028293
> I thought I would need it during these tasks but it seems if we're
> only setting weights/local-pref to all prefixes being received on
> inbound route-map, it's not needed.
> I suspect if we match a specifix prefix using a route-map to set the
> preference, then this command would be required inbound. I'll play
> with this some more - but any comments welcome.
>
> That's about it.
>
> Cheers,
> Con.
> _______________________________________________
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>



-- 
Bryan Bartik
CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP
Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to