Diagram should not say .4 for R4 for that connection. Yes, R4 should have the .3 address assigned.
Regarding the other subnet between R2, R5, and R6, if you have 3 hosts and are proposing a /30, how would you number the hosts, considering that the network and broadcast addresses for the subnet are unusable? On 7/30/08, Carlos Valero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Lab 5, Task 2.1 > > I think that there is a BIG problem with the solution to this simple task: > > Configure Frame Relay between R2, R4, R5, and R6. R2 should be the hub. > Only R2 is allowed to create subinterfaces. R2-R4 has a different subnet > than the rest of the cloud. Use the most appropriate and efficient subnet > masks for Frame Relay routers. > > But the IP's assigned to R2 and R4 are in different subnets! > > R2(config)#int ser0/1/0 > R2(config-if)#encap frame > R2(config-if)#int ser0/1/0.4 point-to-point > R2(config-subif)#frame interface-dlci 204 > R2(config-fr-dlci)#ip address 172.16.24.2 255.255.255.254 > > R4(config)#int ser0/0/0 > R4(config-if)#encap frame > R4(config-if)#frame map ip 172.16.24.4 402 > R4(config-if)#frame map ip 172.16.24.2 402 broad > R4(config-if)#ip address 172.16.24.4 255.255.255.254 > > R4 should be configured with IP: 172.16.24.3 255.255.255.254 > for this to work! > > Otherwise, the Subnet Mask should be changed to 255.255.255.248 > > But then, it would not be complying with the requirements. > > The other Subnet (R2, R5, R6) has an issue as well. > The most efficient subnet mask would be a /30 subnet. > But the solution uses a /29. > > The configuration given in the solution does work, but it's not the most > efficient subnet mask either! Not a big deal in this case, but I still > wanted to mention this little issue. > > The first subnet, though, is a problem. > I see that this was corrected later in the Lab (although it wasn't > mentioned), because in Task 3.3 a SH IP ROUTE in R2 does show the correct > IP for R4 (172.16.24.3) > > In any case, I just wanted to give some heads up. > > > CV. > > > > --- On *Wed, 7/30/08, Carlos Valero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: > > From: Carlos Valero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL2-LAB4-Task1.1 > To: [email protected], "Marvin Greenlee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2008, 11:22 AM > > > Sorry, I forgot to change the Subject. > This is for Lab 4, initial task. > ---------------------------------------- > > There is a problem with the instructions and the Diagram for this Lab. > > Diagram 4A shows a connection between: > R1 - F0/1 and R2 F1/0 ==> VLAN 20 > > But the connections Table (pg. 56) says: R1 - F0/1 ==> Cat2 F0/1 with no > VLAN! > > So I guess the connection should be the usual (like other Labs): > > R1 - F0/0 and R2 F1/0 ==> VLAN 20 > > But then R1's port F0/1 would be disconnected! > But it can't be disconnected, because there is an IP assigned to the > segment between R1 and Cat1, which is later used in the Lab! > > I don't know, but I'm having a VERY hard time trying to figure this out. > > These are the most up to date Diagrams. So I guess this problem has not > been corrected yet. > > I hope somebody can help! > > > Thanks! > > > > > > --- On *Wed, 7/30/08, Carlos Valero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: > > From: Carlos Valero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL2-LAB3-Task8.3 > To: [email protected], "Marvin Greenlee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2008, 11:20 AM > > > Hello, > > There is a problem with the instructions and the Diagram for this Lab. > > Diagram 4A shows a connection between: > R1 - F0/1 and R2 F1/0 ==> VLAN 20 > > But the connections Table (pg. 56) says: R1 - F0/1 ==> Cat2 F0/1 with no > VLAN! > > So I guess the connection should be the usual (like other Labs): > > R1 - F0/0 and R2 F1/0 ==> VLAN 20 > > But then R1's port F0/1 would be disconnected! > But it can't be disconnected, because there is an IP assigned to the > segment between R1 and Cat1, which is later used in the Lab! > > I don't know, but I'm having a VERY hard time trying to figure this out. > > These are the most up to date Diagrams. So I guess this problem has not > been corrected yet. > > I hope somebody can help! > > > Thanks! > > > > > > --- On *Tue, 7/29/08, Marvin Greenlee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: > > From: Marvin Greenlee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL2-LAB3-Task8.3 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2008, 5:59 PM > > Recommendations for traffic shaping for voice: > > Do not exceed the CIR of the PVC. > > Do not use frame relay adaptive shaping > > Make Bc small so that Tc is small > > Set Be = zero > > > > > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk652/tk698/technologies_tech_note09186a00800d6788.shtml#sampe2 > > > > Read very carefully what you are asked to do. The section is just asking > you to configure traffic shaping, and gives you all the pertinent values. > > > > The section does NOT state that "only voice traffic should be shaped". > > > > Marvin Greenlee, CCIE #12237 (R&S, SP, Sec) > Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc. > Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 > Fax: +1.810.454.0130 > > Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Progress or excuses, which one are you making? > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Carlos Valero [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 29, 2008 4:23 PM > *To:* ccie [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Marvin Greenlee > *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL2-LAB3-Task8.3 > > > > *Task 8.3: > * > This is the most intriguing one: > > *You are worried about the voice traffic you have flowing over the frame > relay. > Configure Frame Relay traffic shaping on R2, R4, R5, and R6 with the > following parameters: * > • Cir 256K > • Bc 2560 > • Be 0 > • MinCir 256K > > The solution simply creates a map-class and then applies Traffic Shapping: > > R5(config)#map-class frame-relay VoiceTraffic > R5(config-map-class)# frame-relay cir 256000 > R5(config-map-class)# frame-relay bc 2560 > R5(config-map-class)# frame-relay be 0 > R5(config-map-class)# frame-relay mincir 256000 > > R5(config)#int ser0/1/0 > R5(config-if)#frame traffic-shap > R5(config-if)#frame interface-dlci 514 > R5(config-fr-dlci)#class VoiceTraffic > R5(config)#do show traffic-shape > > But this is being applied to ALL traffic! Voice traffic has not been > selected! > > *Shouldn't we select Voice Traffic first? > * > Could you please explain? > > Thanks! > > > *The End :-) > * > > > --- On *Tue, 7/29/08, Carlos Valero < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >* wrote: > > From: Carlos Valero < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL2-LAB3-Task8.1 > To: ccie [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Marvin Greenlee" < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2008, 4:19 PM > > *Task 8.1 > * > Configure a queue for traffic flowing over R9's Serial interface. You will > use the following information: > > • FTP traffic will use 20% of the bandwidth > • HTTP traffic will use 20% of the bandwidth > • IPv6 traffic will use 25% of the bandwidth > • Telnet traffic will use 15% of the bandwidth > > In the solution you write: "*This task can be accomplished using custom > queuing*" > > But I guess this can also be done with MQC, correct? > I don't see any reason why not. Am I wrong? > > But in any case, since we are using Custom Queuing, I don't really > understand why Telnet traffic (queue No. 4) has a limit of 50 > > R9(config)#queue-list 1 queue 4 *limit 50 * > > When the requirements state: "Telnet traffic will use 15% of the bandwidth" > > Could you please explain? > > *Next: Task 8.3 > * > > > > --- On *Tue, 7/29/08, Carlos Valero < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >* wrote: > > From: Carlos Valero < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL2-LAB3-Task4.3 > To: ccie [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Marvin Greenlee" < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2008, 4:13 PM > > *Task 4.3 > * > *BGP AS 178 has two equal paths to AS 111 via R5 and R6. Configure R7 so > R6 is the primary route for all routes originating from AS 111 and a backup > for all other routes. R5 should be the backup for routes coming from AS > 111 and the primary route for all others. Do not configure weight, > AS-path, or communities for this task. > * > Here we want to change the Local-Pref to "*routes coming from AS 111*". > But in the solution *you apply it to ALL routes!* > > R7(config)#*route-map LP * > R7(config-route-map)#*set local-preference 200 > > *R7(config)#*router bgp 178 * > R7(config-router)#*neighbor 110.99.6.6 route-map LP in * > > Shouldn't we need a Reg-Exp to select *only routes from AS 111? > * > I think that the route-map should be like this: > > *ip as-path access-list 1 permit _111$ * > *route-map LP > match as-path 1 > * *set local-preference 200 * > > Or, since we don't really know for sure that the routes are originating in > AS 111, but we do know that they have path 111-112, then the as-path > access-list should be: > > *ip as-path access-list 1 permit ^112_111_ > * > > Could you please explain? > > *Next: Task 8.1: > * > > --- On *Tue, 7/29/08, Carlos Valero < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >* wrote: > > From: Carlos Valero < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL2-LAB3-Task3.4 > To: ccie [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Marvin Greenlee" < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2008, 3:56 PM > > Hello, > > I was working on Vol 2, Lab # 3 and I found a few problems. > > I have a few questions about the following Tasks: > > *Task 3.4 > Task 4.3 > Task 8.1 > Task 8.3 > * > I'm going to send 4 messages, describing the questions that I have for each > of these Tasks. > > *Task 3.4: Description: > * > *Configure R9 to pass only route 4.0.0.0/7 and all of the 5.x.x.x routes > from BB3 to R6. > Be sure that R9 uses no more than 15% of its bandwidth on interfaces in > order to support EIGRP. > * > The first step that you take is to filter all 4.0.0.0/7 prefixes. > > R9(config)#*ip prefix-list TEST permit 4.0.0.0/7 le 32 > *R9(config)#*router eigrp 100 > *R9(config-router)#*distribute-list prefix TEST in fa0/1 > * > But we should also allow the 5.0.0.0/8 prefixes! And I don't see how you > are accomplishing that! > > Then there is typo! You call Route-map *5only*, but you have not created > it! > Instead, you created route-map 4and5. So I guess that's the one that > should be called in the "ip summary-address" statement. But I want to > confirm that that's what you meant to do. > > R9(config)#*route-map 4and5 * > R9(config-route-map)#match ip address prefix* 5only * > R9(config-route-map)#exit > R9(config)#ip prefix-list *5only* permit 5.0.0.0/8 le 32 > R9(config)#int mu1 > R9(config-if)#ip summary-address eigrp 100 4.0.0.0 254.0.0.0 leak-map *5only > * > > But the main question remains: How can we try to "leak" all the 5.0.0.0/8 > prefixes, when they were allowed to come in to start with. > > Could you please confirm? > > *Next: Task 4.3 > * > > > --- On *Fri, 7/18/08, Marvin Greenlee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: > > From: Marvin Greenlee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL1-LAB18-18.12 > To: "'Suresh Mishra'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "'osl'" < ccie _ > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Friday, July 18, 2008, 12:41 PM > > What exactly do you mean by "interface bandwidth-default formula"? > > > > The section gives clear bandwidth values for each class, which are shown in > > the output of the "show policy map" in the proctor guide as very > > close > > values. > > > > If you have an alternate solution, you are welcome to post it. The section > > solution meets the requirements as stated. > > > > Marvin > > > > Greenlee, CCIE #12237 (R&S, SP, Sec) > > Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc. > > Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 > > Fax: +1.810.454.0130 > > Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Progress or excuses, which one are you making? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ccie [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto: ccie [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Suresh Mishra > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:31 AM > > To: osl > > Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL1-LAB18-18.12 > > > > I was working on this LAB today. The requirement for this LAB is to > > express bytes using bandwidth percent instead of bandwidth command. To > > calculate the percentage bandwidth, the answer in the P.G did not > > consider the interface bandwidth vlaue instead it used the (Interface > > bandwidth -default ) formula which is applicable only if "Banwidth > > percent remaining" command is used instead of bandwidth percent. > > > > I would like to know why the author of > > > > the > > P.G did not use the > > interface bandwidth instead used (interbw-default) > > > > > > thanks > > Suresh > > > > > > > > > > >
