ccnp 300-101 forum

ccnp 300-101 forum

Configuration and implementation Floating static route 23 RIPv2 manual summary Network 10.1.45.0 0.0.0.255 area 0 Example 2 : Configure the interface: About route reflection clusters Tool overview 62 / / Match the commu value to be deleted During the above events,ccnp 300-101 forum, the contents of the following fields will not change: ICMP redirect switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q switchport mode trunk Ip route 100.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 null0 Distribute-list 62 CDMA-Ix CDMA Ix interface Both R1 and R2 inject 100.0.1.0 and 100.0.2.0 into BGP using network . Transparent mode VTP configuration revision number is always 0 Ip prefix-list 1 seq 5 permit 1.1.1.0/24 route-map test permit 1 Related commands : The KEEPALIVE message contains only 19 bytes of BGP headers, and does not contain any other data. * VTP mode R3 configuration is as follows ( If MED is empty , it is set to 0) If the route learns to a non- client IBGP peer , it is reflected to all clients and EBGP neighbors. Match ip address prefix-list 1 2 2 : Reponse message, send all or part of its routing information, one About PBR Must be zero Ip default-network 172.16.3.0 becomes: ip route 172.16.0.0 255.255.0.0 172.16.3.0 Ip default-network 172.16.0.0 Configuring bridge priority Two routes, on R2 we introduce these two routes using re-release : Definition of 1042 . The most commonly used encapsulation format today is the format defined by RFC894 , commonly referred to as Ethernet II or Ethernet DIX . Path Match 100 , 1400 , 300 400, etc. Or the above example, if we R1 on, of ping 1.1.1.2 REPEAT size. 1 1501 , at this time, R1 due to the generation of the IP packet is larger than Establish BGP neighbor relations Active By default, BGP does not allow static default routes to be injected when static is re-released ; unless it is in the BGP process at the same time default-information originate The PC has obtained the address and viewed dhcp snooping bingding databsae on SW1 : Obviously, the DHCP server is aware of the above problem, and the action it takes is to ignore this DHCP request. Therefore the PC cannot get the address. SW1#show int trunk Route tag 1111 Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path Bgp dampening ? [Experiment 5 ] There are subnet routes, the subnet route prefix length is different (but both match), and the longest match Set ip next-hop verify-availability Instead of tearing down and rebuilding TCP or BGP connections, only the update operation is triggered to make the new routing policy take effect. Soft reset can be used for both inbound and outbound policies only due to outbound or inbound policies. Policy-based Routing (PBR) Policy Routing 80 If a designated discarding interface issue proposal after, did not receive Agreement , it will slowly transition to the forwarding state, this process is a traditional 802.1D the listening-learning-forwarding process. This situation may occur when the peer switch does not understand the RSTP BPDUs or the port of the peer switch is blocked . RIP-2 MD5 Authentication Advertised to update-groups: 1 32768 2.2.2.2 TYPE After completing the above steps, the logical etherchannel interface is set up. ? Clear ip bgp {neighbor-address} soft in/out specifies a specific neighbor, it is recommended Match ip address prefix-list 11 set community 100:11 Network 12.12.12.0 mask 255.255.255.0 R2 RIPv2 192.168.1.0 declares that it has entered RIP , and R3 and R4 can learn this route and load it into its own global routing table. Then if we are at 100 * i100.0.2.0/24 1 It is recognized that the attribute must be followed to describe the next hop router to the destination. Any ( FraIue check sequence ) R2#sh ip b 100.100.100.0 Local updater ID is 0.0.0.0 (no valid interface found) The configuration of R2 is as follows: 14 VTP pruning The problem is similar to that mentioned above. Both R2 and R3 can learn to update the BGP B network segment route from R4 . Suppose R2 republish do first, then B routes will be injected into the OSPF , the finally R3 learned, then R3 , the same time from the OSPF and IBGP learned this route, will preferably OSPF , since OSPF is AD smaller. As a result, on R3 , the redistribution of IBGP to OSPF fails because the route of the B network segment is not BGP in the routing table . Furthermore, R3 has been re-released in both directions. Therefore , the route of the B network segment will be re-released back to IBGP . Since then, there may be a series of problems such as sub-optimal paths and loops.