Fair? Why would you think it is not "fair? Consider that the command you give is straightforward and will indeed enable IPX routing. Now then, do you know what happens as a result of that command? Have you thought of this in terms of how an IPX network is numbered, and what an important and significant component of that numbering involves?
Having done so, can you think of any reasons you might want to influence that component? Using your command ( which works fine ), if you were to do a "show IPX interface" what would you find? If you were to influence the MAC in some manner, and then were to do a "show IPX interface", now what would you find? Would one or the other be more useful in certain situations, say if you were trying to troubleshoot IPX routing or IPX connectivity? Fair? ""Mike Sweeney"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have a IPX question in my CCNA practice test beta and I've had some mixed > feedback on it. The questions asks what is the command to enable IPX routing > on a router and gives a MAC address as part of the question. The question is > a *fill in the blank* type. The answer I have is: > > ipx routing > > Is making the MAC a requirement of the answer a *fair* use of the command? I > thought so even though IPX routing will automaticaly assign the node > address. I felt inclusion of the MAC into the question was a clue that it > needed to specified. Is this too much to ask of a budding CCNA? > > PS- for those who would want to look at the entire beta, it's 60 questions > at this point and a free download.. as long as you use the feedback form to > give me yes, no, it sucks etc..etc.. :) I have managed to get some good > feedback so far and will always take more. > > www.packetattack.com/tutorials.html > > Thanks > > MikeS Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45143&t=45138 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
