ccnp 300-135 study guide pdf

ccnp 300-135 study guide pdf

!! ISP1 , ISP2 and GW all need to open CDP // 100: 200 indicates that this is for the AS200 's Experimental example: Called when republishing Integrated pvst functionality and publicization R1(config)# access-list 1 deny 11.11.11.0 R1(config)# access-list 1 permit any R1(config)# route-map rp permit 10 R1(config-route-map) match ip address 1 R1(config )# router bgp 100 The number of messages sent by MsgSent to the neighbor Neighbor management FastEthernet1/0 The so-called one-arm routing is on the Ethernet port of the router (must be above 100M interface) to carry VLAN traffic,ccnp 300-135 study guide pdf, let the router and switch run a trunk , use dot1Q encapsulation, at this time, in order to let the router's Ethernet port support Dot1Q To identify and carry VLAN traffic, you need to divide the subinterface of the physical interface, as shown in the figure above. At this time, he himself will still forward if he receives the data packet to 3.0.0.0 , but will not forward to other rips. Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal Distribute-list 1 out rip version number DUAL AS provides a migration solution: Allow R2 's BGP process to take into account both AS numbers, 200 and 201 , of which 200 The cost of the route. DHCPsnooping Interface configuration: spanning-tree bpdufilter enable Y Implementation of CEF Route-map test permit 20 Trunk configuration One-arm routing The switch receives the DHCP request , which inserts option82 information into the message (of course, you must do the corresponding configuration first). In the inserted information, the remote-ID suboption is the MAC of the switch ; the circuit-ID suboption is received. The interface ID to the DHCP request message . 14 packets, 7640 bytes Neighbor management Router ospf 1 Next Hop Matches the network number and prefix length in the route prefix to enhance the accuracy of the match. The certificate contains the password information when it is verified using plain text. Therefore, you need to use the MAC address reduction scheme. On R2 and R3 , there are two OSPF processes. If shown, one is OSPF1 and the other is OSPF2 . Note that this dual process is mainly implemented on the two ASBRs R2 and R3 . Neighbor 4.4.4.4 update-source Loopback0 neighbor 10.1.25.2 remote-as 200 If there is an EBGP connection between R2 , then a routing loop occurs, and R1 and R2 will receive the summary route and accept the routing update. This is because this summary route does not carry any information about AS100 and AS200 . Weight Solution: Use distribution lists to avoid the sub-optimal routing problem Gateway of last resort is 172.16.12.1 to network 192.168.1.0 DHCP static address binding Supplementary explanation of the role of the as_set keyword: Beta Ip address 192.168.10.254 255.255.255.0 Timers 29 The switch forwards the DHCP packets carrying the Option 82 information to the DHCP server. The summary of the route is actually done by the operation of the subnet mask. For the following example: The configuration of R1 is as follows: Ip prefix-list 11 deny 12.12.12.0/24 ip prefix-list 11 permit 0.0.0.0/0 le 32 router bgp 100 RIPv2 supports authentication by changing the field in the RIP message that should normally be the first route entry . In the single update message with authentication , the maximum number of route entries that can be carried is reduced to 24 . [Start process exchange] This can indeed avoid the suboptimal path problem, but it leaves a hidden danger: Preferably EBGP route 20 IP ^10. Complete basic configuration 2 Exist-map Routing Information Protocol (RIP) Load distribution: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 (refcount 1) Then, if an OSPF process (this sentence may not be rigorous, everyone understands what I mean), the route can not be summarized, such as the following figure. There are already many arp firewalls on the market that can be recognized. Of course, there are some simple methods, such as arp-a to see if the MAC is correct. Or catch a bag and so on. After completing this configuration, we can show it: When track1 is true , that is, 10.1.1.2 is reachable, the data of the PC accessing the 100 network is lost to 10.1.1.2 . If track 1 is hung, the next next-hop is switched. bootPC: 67 (client port number); bootPS : 68 (server port number) *> In the one local BGP routes advertised to EBGP the Peer time, whether they carry MED values , need to be determined under the following conditions ( not EBGP Access switch configuration: Bgp bestpath as−path ignore This command, if configured, skips this rule In R2 opened on loopback interfaces 2.2.2.0/24 , R2 both redistributed RIP into OSPF , they redistribute directly connected into OSPF The default is 6 update cycles, which is 180s . The route entry tag when an entry with a larger hop count is received Access-list 1 deny 192.168.1.0 ? Example 1 : Using route-map to associate neighbor filtering routes PVLAN considerations TIMER Supplementary] When the same AS in the BGP router A introduces a route, A router transmitted the route to its IBGP neighbors B , has been Re-routing interface connecting the local release, static routing weight is 32768 We restore the experimental environment to the basic configuration: BGP neighbor relationships are as follows Define a DHCP address pool. One network segment corresponds to one address pool. Therefore, when the IGP route network into BGP , the MED value inherits the metric value in the IGP protocol. After the interface is configured, the interface switches to the err-disable state immediately after receiving the BPDU . R3 sets the tag when injecting the route. Routers can learn routing entries in a variety of ways: static manual configuration, various dynamic routing protocols, and more. When the router learns two routes to the same destination from two different ways, the router compares the AD values ​​of the two routes , that is, the management distance, preferably the route with a small AD value. If the AD values ​​are equal, for example, the same routing protocol, the metric value is further compared . Of course, this also involves the working mechanism problem of different routing protocols, which is specifically discussed for different routing protocols. As shown in the following figure, R3 and R1 run the RIP protocol, and R3 establishes adjacency relationship with R2 through OSPF . Therefore, R3 learns the route to the destination 1.1.1.0/24 from RIP and OSPF . The two routes use R1 and R2 as the next hop respectively. Then R3 finally chooses the OSPF route to be loaded into the routing table, which is to use R2 as the actual destination.