Depends on how they checked it. Ask if in doubt.
Regards, Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP From: Di Bias, Steve [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:37 AM To: Tyson Scott; 'Jay Taylor' Cc: 'Rob Pool'; [email protected] Subject: RE: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 Lab17.5 Makes sense, but what about from a CCIE lab perspective? Would points have been awarded here without making the change in question? Tyson Scott <[email protected]> wrote: Real World If a communication is initiated to the real address the response will come from the NAT'ed address. Regards, Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP From: Jay Taylor [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:25 AM To: Tyson Scott Cc: Di Bias, Steve; Rob Pool; [email protected] Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 Lab17.5 Is that an assumption you'd make in the lab or an 'ask the proctor' situation? On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Tyson Scott <[email protected]> wrote: You shouldn't announce a NAT'ed route. Regards, Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Di Bias, Steve Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 11:08 PM To: Rob Pool; [email protected] Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 Lab17.5 I have seen this question from time to time (myself included) so you're not alone in your thinking here. The short answer is that the network should be private, and by advertising it in OSPF, any traffic sent to the network will end up having a NAT'd response, causing unwanted issues (or something like that) In all honesty, I'm not sure if you would lose points here or not, will leave that for Tyson or Marko HTH Thank you. Steve Di Bias Network Engineer - Information Systems Valley Health System - Las Vegas Office - 702- 369-7594 Cell - 702-241-1801 [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rob Pool Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 4:10 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 Lab17.5 The Task states the following: Configure R4 to translate any IP Traffic from subnet 150.100.40.0/24 outbound to use it s0/0/0 interface. 150.100.41.0 should proceed unchanged. The DSG shows the OSPF process being modified to no longer advertise the route of the natted network. I understand the thought process behind that, but it doesn't seem necesary to meet the requirements of the task. I'm trying to stick to the idea that if it's not called for then I'm not going to make any additional changes. I was just wondering if maybe I was missing something. _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com UHS Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited. If this was sent to you in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com UHS Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited, and may be punishable by law. If this was sent to you in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
