Jump to content

CCIE-EI lab attempted - Discussion -1.15


Recommended Posts

Just to share my experience , did an attemtp in Brussels last week:

The Pass Enterprise Lab dumps posted in the forum i would say its now arround 70-60%.

What i found new:

Keep in mind this is what i remember, some of this might already be known

 

*L2*

 - Spanning Tree is now MST with password showing as 32b hex (password hidden command)

 -  VPT V3 for MST

*OSPF*

 - HQ is now in area 1

 - DC is in area 0

 - DC should only see 1 10.x.x.x/16 route coming from HQ

 - OSPF Connection between sw101/sw201 should be used as primary and fallback to sw102/sw202 if it fails (don't remember the exact wording)

**SP-BGP**

 - Asking for Peer-groups between R3/R4/R5 with R3 as RR, and asking to minimize the number of of connections

**DNA**

 - Asking to configure tacacs on ise via dna on the vty lines only of some routes

**MPLS**

- Limit the number of mps lables

 - Hide the MPLS lables

 

 

 

 

Edited by jonny18
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No putty, everything is web based , so the whole scenario is embedded in a webpage access via firefox, telnet sessions, lab guide , network scenarios and questions. the only thing outside in the desktop of the pc is a notpad and a calculator

The webpage as soon as the lab starts has a counter  with the lab time that when it reaches 0 the lab closes automatically, also if you finish the design stage early you can start the configuration stage, but you dont get any extra time for the configuration stage for it, you just get to start the config stage early but that means you also finish early

Edited by jonny18
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @jonny18 how did it go? Did you pass? Also can you expand on this:

**DNA**

 - Asking to configure tacacs on ise via dna on the vty lines only of some routes

**MPLS**

- Limit the number of mps lables (is it refering to mpls label range?)

 - Hide the MPLS lables (what do you mean hide mpls label? one label per vrf?)

 

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no not this time, i was using outdated dumps.

on DNA they ask to configure tacacs on some routers but the config is done over DNA, this is basically integrating dna with ise and enabling tacacs  there is a cisco doc has a step by step on how to do this

**MPLS**

the wording is the same as in old dumps on 1.10 point 2 and 3

 - dont think is label range related because there was no range mentioned in the question, makes no sense to configure a random  label range

Belive the answer is  as already seen in a few dumps:

mpls label mode all-vrfs protocol bgp-vpnv4 per-vrf

mpls label mode all-vrfs protocol bgp-vpnv6 per-vrf

no mpls ip propagate-ttl forwarded

Edited by jonny18
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply @jonny18. Hopefully next time is a pass! Did you run out of time in the DOO section?
About the ISE/TACACs thing, mind sharing that article/link if you have? I find some articles explaining how to integrate DNAC w/ TACACs for user auth but only for users loging into DNAc and I don't think that's what's needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/3/2022 at 11:34 PM, jonny18 said:

Just to share my experience , did an attemtp in Brussels last week:

The Pass Enterprise Lab dumps posted in the forum i would say its now arround 70-60%.

What i found new:

Keep in mind this is what i remember, some of this might already be known

 

*L2*

 - Spanning Tree is now MST with password showing as 32b hex (password hidden command)

 -  VPT V3 for MST

*OSPF*

 - HQ is now in area 1

 - DC is in area 0

 - DC should only see 1 10.x.x.x/16 route coming from HQ

 - OSPF Connection between sw101/sw201 should be used as primary and fallback to sw102/sw202 if it fails (don't remember the exact wording)

**SP-BGP**

 - Asking for Peer-groups between R3/R4/R5 with R3 as RR, and asking to minimize the number of of connections

**DNA**

 - Asking to configure tacacs on ise via dna on the vty lines only of some routes

**MPLS**

- Limit the number of mps lables

 - Hide the MPLS lables

 

 

 

 

Hi Jonny, Would you share the link for "The Pass Enterprise Lab dumps"? Thank you, AB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/4/2022 at 12:34 AM, jonny18 said:

Just to share my experience , did an attemtp in Brussels last week:

The Pass Enterprise Lab dumps posted in the forum i would say its now arround 70-60%.

What i found new:

Keep in mind this is what i remember, some of this might already be known

 

*L2*

 - Spanning Tree is now MST with password showing as 32b hex (password hidden command)

 -  VPT V3 for MST

*OSPF*

 - HQ is now in area 1

 - DC is in area 0

 - DC should only see 1 10.x.x.x/16 route coming from HQ

 - OSPF Connection between sw101/sw201 should be used as primary and fallback to sw102/sw202 if it fails (don't remember the exact wording)

**SP-BGP**

 - Asking for Peer-groups between R3/R4/R5 with R3 as RR, and asking to minimize the number of of connections

**DNA**

 - Asking to configure tacacs on ise via dna on the vty lines only of some routes

**MPLS**

- Limit the number of mps lables

 - Hide the MPLS lables

 

 

 

 

Which dumps did you use?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
On 1/18/2023 at 1:48 AM, visasman said:

Folks, I have issue with section 1.15 "Extending connectivity to IaaS". Can anyone shed light where the mistake is!

With the configuration below, R11/R3's IPv6 routes are not shown as <*best, but as *valid routes. Since the BGP IPv6 learned routes are not installed in RIB, which resulted host11/12 in HQ IaaS from reaching R30.

image.png.23b45842e5e236bd3f8801b9c0f9dfb2.png

 

This is the hidden content, please

 

!

interface loopback0

 ip address 100.255.254.4 255.255.255.255

!

Hey,

to come back to your question, I do not have any material but with the given output, but can it be that you need to put the Interface E0/0 on R3 into the VRF?
Its the same when you configure the PE device of a MPLS L3 VPN.

Thats wrong I say it under another post. And when I am thinking of that, ebgp multihop is right.

 

Edited by applejoe
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...