As Long as it doesn't break requirements
Regards, Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP Managing Partner / Sr. Instructor - IPexpert, Inc. Mailto: [email protected] Telephone: +1.810.326.1444, ext. 208 Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat eFax: +1.810.454.0130 IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand, Audio Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco CCIE (R&S, Voice, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with training locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and Australia. Be sure to visit our online communities at www.ipexpert.com/communities and our public website at www.ipexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard Chan Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 3:22 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Security] Vol1 - Lab 2A - Task 2.2: pool...route-add OR secondary IP addresses to BGP? Hi, Vol1 - Lab 2A - Task 2.2 uses ip pool...add-route to enable the inside global addresses to be injected into BGP. It uses two dummy pools on R2 to do this. (Apart from lab restrictions on adding IP addresses), technically, from a routing perspective would secondary IP addresses on the, say, the inside interfaces add the necessary routes to BGP? E.g. On R2 Two dummy pools to inject static route ip nat pool DUMMY1 9.2.1.150 9.2.1.10 prefix 24 add-route ip nat pool DUMMY2 9.2.13.150 9.2.13.150 prefix 24 add-route Alternative: int fa0/1.10 ip address 9.2.1.2 255.255.255.0 secondary int fa0/1.13 ip address 9.2.13.2 255.255.255.0 secondary !--- dummy connected routes to inject inside-globals into BGP What do you think? Thanks Richard
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
