Jump to content
xxcciexx

Lab Config New Variation

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

 

There is a new variation of the config lab out. Two colleagues went for the exam yesterday and got it.

1. MST should be configured for Layer 2

2. No etherchannel between SW3 & SW4. It is asked to block VLAN 34 on ether 2/0 and forward it on ether 2/1. This needs to be done without touching SW3.

3. R17 both physical interface are in VRF Corp.

4. The VRF Name change. No more red, blue, green.

 

I still couldn't do the task 2 and 3. Regarding blocking of VLan 34, we need to make all amendments on SW4. Can someone advise how can we achieve this please?

 

 

And For the VRF. R17 both physical interface are in VRF. But i still couldn't manage to make OSPF neighborship between the HUb and SPOKE. Can someone write me the config for HUb and SPOKE. Both the tunnel interface are in VRF.

 

Thanks in advance.

XXCCIEXX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For R17 variation, you need to put the tunnel inside the VRF using 'ip vrf forwarding <VRF>' or 'vrf forward <VRF>'. Also, under the tunnel, configure 'tunnel vrf <VRF>'. Make sure you create a VRF specific keyring for the pre-shared key.

 

You need to configure OSPF to be VRF specific:

 

router ospf <> vrf <>

router-id <>

network <>

 

On Spoke side, if only WAN facing interface is in VRF, then just put 'tunnel vrf <VRF>' under the tunnel interface. Like hub, create VRF specific keyring for pre-shared key.

 

For the STP issue, you can change the interface cost/port-priority for the specific VLAN:

 

SW4(config-if)#spanning-tree vlan 34 ?

cost Change an interface's per VLAN spanning tree path cost

port-priority Change an interface's spanning tree port priority

 

This way, you can prefer one link to be forwarding and the other to be blocked.

Edited by ccieaspire007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SW3,4,5 and 6 uses MST.

instance 1 = ODD vlan, instance 2 = EVEN vlan

 

MST(ODD VLAN+EVEN VLAN) + VLAN34 can not be controlled.

I also want to know the method.

 

thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SW3,4,5 and 6 uses MST.

instance 1 = ODD vlan, instance 2 = EVEN vlan

 

MST(ODD VLAN+EVEN VLAN) + VLAN34 can not be controlled.

I also want to know the method.

 

thanks

 

True, if its MST, the entire instance will be affected (whichever instance VLAN 34 is a part of).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For R17 variation, you need to put the tunnel inside the VRF using 'ip vrf forwarding <VRF>' or 'vrf forward <VRF>'. Also, under the tunnel, configure 'tunnel vrf <VRF>'. Make sure you create a VRF specific keyring for the pre-shared key.

 

You need to configure OSPF to be VRF specific:

 

router ospf <> vrf <>

router-id <>

network <>

 

On Spoke side, if only WAN facing interface is in VRF, then just put 'tunnel vrf <VRF>' under the tunnel interface. Like hub, create VRF specific keyring for pre-shared key.

 

For the STP issue, you can change the interface cost/port-priority for the specific VLAN:

 

SW4(config-if)#spanning-tree vlan 34 ?

cost Change an interface's per VLAN spanning tree path cost

port-priority Change an interface's spanning tree port priority

 

This way, you can prefer one link to be forwarding and the other to be blocked.

 

If I change the interface cost/port-priority for the specific vlan, it doesnt affect the related vlan because of mst. We can not change the one of the vlan`s priority/cost, if it is in mst instance.

 

What is the correct solution for vlan 34 issue ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe the correct solution is change port-pri/cost on the interrfaces, but you're right, that's why in some, wb, they have verification show spann mst 1 because it affects the whole mst. they are testing whether you know that or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks William.

According to the some wb, they change the port-priority under int Eth2/1 on SW4 and also remove the vlan 34 from eth2/0 trunk port on both switch.

What can be the reason to the delete vlan 34 from eth2/0 ? I think it`s unnecessery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is too. Although they say the reason is because sw3 e2/1 gets stuck in blocking so maybe a way to get it "unstuck". I did experience it getting stuck but I just played around with spanning tree to get it unstuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hellow C. F (CCIE Friend).

Thank you very much for that information Thursday, next Monday, I am thinking the third trial (the tears are bad.

 

Use something as appropriate for your sentences.

1. If you have vrf in R17, but you do not have vrf in wan port I think that it is better not to set non crypto vrf.

* Additional I wish to consider your multicast part (w / vrf)

* Http://certcollection.org/forum/topic/312101-new-lab-a5-vrf-issue-aboutthinkplease-share/

 

2. You wrote that STP should enable vlan 34 only in that section. Next, in other applications where port is blocked against that vlan 34, are there any other vlans affected?

I would like to say that not only vlan 34 but also other vlan need to set up together?

 

Looking at the sentence you created, I think my spirit is going to Andromeda. ㅠㅠ

Let's fight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...