I agree the errors are annoying. I do cut them some slack because putting together labs of these magnitude is a difficult thing. What is aggravating to me is that reported errors never seem to be corrected. I used to send in errors I found to the list, but rarely do any more because it never seemed to make a difference. I think if they made a dedicated effort to correct errors that were reported they could take their product to the next level.
-Marc On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 8:41 AM, mark salmon <[email protected]> wrote: > I am somewhat disappointed with the IPexpert labs, i am seeing too many > errors that should be caught. I am working on WB 2. Lab #5 has typpgraphical > errors the lab diagram did not match the description in the text, for BGP > they clearly sated that the new loopback addresses (task 4.2) that states the > router should advertise 192.168.100.0/23 via Ibgp. The answer have us filter > those routes globally in BGP so r6 will get the /23 and not the more > specific. My solution was to use a RM and block the more specific to the Ibgp > peer and not to the EBGP peer. Not sure if that is an error per se, I am more > concerned about the actual errors ("wrong" IP addresses) concerns me. > > Thoughts? > > "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be > one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded > fear." Thomas Jefferson > " Where ignorance is bliss 'tis folly to be wise" > _______________________________________________ > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit www.ipexpert.com > > Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > www.PlatinumPlacement.com > _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
