I googled it and found the link. It's from last Oct., but it was Marko. http://blog.ipexpert.com/2011/10/11/will-there-be-a-blueprint-change/
Regards, Jay McMickle- CCNP, CCSP, CCDP, MCSE ________________________________ From: Bob McCouch <[email protected]> To: Tony Singh <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 12:47 PM Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 75, Issue 36 I'm unaware of any announced changes to the exam, and Cisco's policy is that before a major change (like 4.0 to 5.0) they will give "plenty" of warning which is at least 6 months as far as I know. Sent from my iPad On Apr 22, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Tony Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi guys > > A speculative question but I need to know if v4 will become v5 anytime soon, > reason for asking is I'm planning on buying equipment and training materials > and do not want to buy old gear. > > BR > > Tony > CCNP CCNA R&S > > Sent from my iPhone on 3 > > On 22 Apr 2012, at 08:20, [email protected] wrote: > >> Send CCIE_RS mailing list submissions to >> [email protected] >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> [email protected] >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> [email protected] >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of CCIE_RS digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: CCIElab lab 5 (Marko Milivojevic) >> 2. Vol 1 - 29.6 (Joe Danrich) >> 3. CCIE level Labs (Breland Rogers) >> 4. VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a (khaled al-ajeman) >> 5. Re: VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a ([email protected]) >> 6. Re: VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a (Joe Danrich) >> 7. Re: Vol 1 - 29.6 (Elie Raad) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 09:16:00 -0700 >> From: Marko Milivojevic <[email protected]> >> To: Jay McMickle <[email protected]> >> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, ccie >> onlyone <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIElab lab 5 >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> Bloody bastard keeps changing email address. We've banned 7 last week. >> >> -- >> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 >> >> :: This message was sent from a mobile device. I apologize for errors and >> brevity. :: >> >> On Apr 21, 2012, at 8:53, Jay McMickle <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> How is it that if I post something even with the slightest opinion, Marko >>> shuts it down, and offline emails me. >>> >>> BUT >>> >>> This guy stays on the distro. I think Marko needs to pay closer watch an >>> help us filter these guys out. ;) >>> >>> Oh, and I expect this continue, even after Marko emails me a nasty note >>> from IPX. >>> >>> Happy labbing weekend, gents! >>> >>> Regards, >>> Jay McMickle- CCNP,CCSP,CCDP >>> Sent from iJay >>> >>> On Apr 21, 2012, at 7:22 AM, ccie onlyone <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> My friend got the new lab, just to get update, add me >>>> >>>> regards, >>>> ccietocome >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 13:52:47 -0700 >> From: Joe Danrich <[email protected]> >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 - 29.6 >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> Okay so in this step it wants you to create two VRF's (VPNA & VPNB) one >> per a specific router.. >> >> It doesn't state anywhere that you are supposed to import each >> respective route-target into one another. A's rt into B and vice versa. >> >> However the results and described solution in the solutions guide, state >> that each router should import the others route-target? >> >> It's contradictory in my mind, that if a step doesn't tell you to do >> something, you shouldn't do it.. >> >> Am I missing something here? >> >> V/R >> >> Joe >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 21:16:53 -0700 (PDT) >> From: Breland Rogers <[email protected]> >> To: IPEXPERT <[email protected]> >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] CCIE level Labs >> Message-ID: >> <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >> >> Hello,? >> >> Could anyone please share any free GNS3 CCIE level labs that are free. ?Im >> 21 and on a budget. >> >> Thanks.? >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 08:57:33 +0300 >> From: khaled al-ajeman <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a >> Message-ID: >> <CACv-o9uinWBPs9=s-kyf1qm5e2ekwrnhu6r7s8kq5+_zcgy...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> >> Hi fellas, >> >> I have done my bgp connection right, but still my bgp connection is not up >> as a matter of fact it is still active. Below are my configuration >> >> R2 ------ > hub >> >> >> R2#sr | s bgp >> router bgp 1 >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >> bgp log-neighbor-changes >> neighbor peergroup peer-group >> neighbor peergroup remote-as 1 >> neighbor peergroup update-source Loopback0 >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 peer-group peergroup >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 peer-group peergroup >> ! >> address-family ipv4 >> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client >> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> ! >> address-family ipv4 multicast >> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client >> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> R2# >> >> >> >> R1 ----------> spoke >> >> R1#sr | s bg >> router bgp 1 >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >> bgp log-neighbor-changes >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 >> ! >> address-family ipv4 >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> ! >> address-family ipv4 multicast >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> R1# >> >> >> >> >> >> R5 --------> Spoke >> >> >> R5#sr | s bg >> router bgp 1 >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >> bgp log-neighbor-changes >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 >> ! >> address-family ipv4 >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> ! >> address-family ipv4 multicast >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> R5# >> >> here is my output from R2: >> >> >> >> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 unicast sum >> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 >> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 >> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down >> State/PfxRcd >> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never >> Active ---------------> it is >> suppose to be 0 for both routers R1 AND R5 >> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active >> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 multicast sum >> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 >> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 >> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down >> State/PfxRcd >> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active >> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active >> R2# >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 06:42:52 +0000 >> From: [email protected] >> To: "khaled al-ajeman" <[email protected]>, >> [email protected], [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a >> Message-ID: >> >><1993407919-1335076970-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-892677182-@b28.c9.bise7.blackberry> >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" >> >> Hi Khaled, >> I am not familar with the topology but have u confirmed layer 3 reachability >> between ur spoke and hub? Sourcing ur icmp pings from your respective >> loopbacks? >> Sent from my BlackBerry? smartphone provided by Airtel Nigeria. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: khaled al-ajeman <[email protected]> >> Sender: [email protected] >> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 08:57:33 >> To: <[email protected]> >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a >> >> Hi fellas, >> >> I have done my bgp connection right, but still my bgp connection is not up >> as a matter of fact it is still active. Below are my configuration >> >> R2 ------ > hub >> >> >> R2#sr | s bgp >> router bgp 1 >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >> bgp log-neighbor-changes >> neighbor peergroup peer-group >> neighbor peergroup remote-as 1 >> neighbor peergroup update-source Loopback0 >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 peer-group peergroup >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 peer-group peergroup >> ! >> address-family ipv4 >> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client >> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> ! >> address-family ipv4 multicast >> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client >> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self >> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate >> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> R2# >> >> >> >> R1 ----------> spoke >> >> R1#sr | s bg >> router bgp 1 >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >> bgp log-neighbor-changes >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 >> ! >> address-family ipv4 >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> ! >> address-family ipv4 multicast >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> R1# >> >> >> >> >> >> R5 --------> Spoke >> >> >> R5#sr | s bg >> router bgp 1 >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >> bgp log-neighbor-changes >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 >> ! >> address-family ipv4 >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> ! >> address-family ipv4 multicast >> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> R5# >> >> here is my output from R2: >> >> >> >> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 unicast sum >> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 >> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 >> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down >> State/PfxRcd >> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never >> Active ---------------> it is >> suppose to be 0 for both routers R1 AND R5 >> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active >> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 multicast sum >> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 >> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 >> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down >> State/PfxRcd >> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active >> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active >> R2# >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 23:55:30 -0700 >> From: Joe Danrich <[email protected]> >> To: khaled al-ajeman <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] VOL. 1 LAB 14.1 a >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> Can you ping from each source BGP Speaker interface to the relevant peer? >> >> V/R >> >> Joe >> >> On 04/21/2012 10:57 PM, khaled al-ajeman wrote: >>> Hi fellas, >>> >>> I have done my bgp connection right, but still my bgp connection is not up >>> as a matter of fact it is still active. Below are my configuration >>> >>> R2 ------> hub >>> >>> >>> R2#sr | s bgp >>> router bgp 1 >>> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >>> bgp log-neighbor-changes >>> neighbor peergroup peer-group >>> neighbor peergroup remote-as 1 >>> neighbor peergroup update-source Loopback0 >>> neighbor 200.0.0.1 peer-group peergroup >>> neighbor 200.0.0.5 peer-group peergroup >>> ! >>> address-family ipv4 >>> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client >>> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self >>> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate >>> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate >>> no auto-summary >>> no synchronization >>> exit-address-family >>> ! >>> address-family ipv4 multicast >>> neighbor peergroup route-reflector-client >>> neighbor peergroup next-hop-self >>> neighbor 200.0.0.1 activate >>> neighbor 200.0.0.5 activate >>> no auto-summary >>> no synchronization >>> exit-address-family >>> R2# >>> >>> >>> >>> R1 ----------> spoke >>> >>> R1#sr | s bg >>> router bgp 1 >>> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >>> bgp log-neighbor-changes >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 >>> ! >>> address-family ipv4 >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >>> no auto-summary >>> no synchronization >>> exit-address-family >>> ! >>> address-family ipv4 multicast >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >>> no auto-summary >>> no synchronization >>> exit-address-family >>> R1# >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> R5 --------> Spoke >>> >>> >>> R5#sr | s bg >>> router bgp 1 >>> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >>> bgp log-neighbor-changes >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 remote-as 1 >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 update-source Loopback0 >>> ! >>> address-family ipv4 >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >>> no auto-summary >>> no synchronization >>> exit-address-family >>> ! >>> address-family ipv4 multicast >>> neighbor 200.0.0.2 activate >>> no auto-summary >>> no synchronization >>> exit-address-family >>> R5# >>> >>> here is my output from R2: >>> >>> >>> >>> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 unicast sum >>> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 >>> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 >>> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down >>> State/PfxRcd >>> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never >>> Active ---------------> it is >>> suppose to be 0 for both routers R1 AND R5 >>> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active >>> R2#sh ip bgp ipv4 multicast sum >>> BGP router identifier 200.0.0.2, local AS number 1 >>> BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1 >>> Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down >>> State/PfxRcd >>> 200.0.0.1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active >>> 200.0.0.5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 never Active >>> R2# >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 07:20:08 +0000 >> From: Elie Raad <[email protected]> >> To: Joe Danrich <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 - 29.6 >> Message-ID: >> >><3840b1aaec7edd4caff9def3ad0131b81b8d7...@amsprd0104mb146.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Hello Joe, >> >> I did the same as you did , but when i read in 29.9 he said that do not >> change next-hop addresses of receiving routes from R2 and R8. which mean >> that he want us to exchange routes coming from R2 and R8 . >> >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Elie Raad >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: [email protected] >> [[email protected]] on behalf of Joe Danrich >> [[email protected]] >> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2012 11:52 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol 1 - 29.6 >> >> Okay so in this step it wants you to create two VRF's (VPNA & VPNB) one >> per a specific router.. >> >> It doesn't state anywhere that you are supposed to import each >> respective route-target into one another. A's rt into B and vice versa. >> >> However the results and described solution in the solutions guide, state >> that each router should import the others route-target? >> >> It's contradictory in my mind, that if a step doesn't tell you to do >> something, you shouldn't do it.. >> >> Am I missing something here? >> >> V/R >> >> Joe >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs >> >> >> >> >> End of CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 75, Issue 36 >> *************************************** > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs _______________________________________________ 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 http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs _______________________________________________ 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 http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
