From: Scott Morris (smorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Aug 08 2001 - 12:06:05 GMT-3
Depending on the IOS version of router code. Otherwise, if you entered the
/16 first, you wouldn't be able to enter the /32, since it would already be
allocated to an area....
So the "best" answer would remain D.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
John Neiberger
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 10:53 AM
To: John.K.Feuerherd@WellsFargo.COM
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Two areas don't make an ABR?
I believe that answer B would put both ethernet interfaces into area 1.
Since network statement processing works like access lists and stops
processing once a match is made, no interfaces would be placed in area 0.
Still, I'm glad that you had a chance to test this. Thanks for checking
this out for us.
John
| after looking at it some more, it means that answer B would be correct
too.
|
| JF
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Chuck Larrieu [mailto:chuck@cl.cncdsl.com]
| Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 10:04 PM
| To: John Neiberger; ccielab@groupstudy.com
| Subject: RE: Two areas don't make an ABR?
|
|
| well, sheet!
|
| the default network type for a loopback is stub. Can an area 0 properly
be a
| stub network?
|
| I thought our conclusion on the other list question was that an area 0
was
| not required ( which is true if all other interfaces are in the same area
)
|
| Chuck
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
| John Neiberger
| Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 9:38 PM
| To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
| Subject: Re: Two areas don't make an ABR?
|
|
| After reading the explanation, I still think that both answers C and D
would
| work. The explanation assumes that assigning Loopback0 to area 0.0.0.0
| would not suffice to make it an ABR. From what I've heard, this actually
| would suffice but perhaps I'm misunderstanding something.
|
| We had this discussion on the other list a couple of months ago. We were
| discussing what would happen in a hub and spoke environment where there
were
| no links on the hub router in area 0.0.0.0. It was decided that as long
as
| there was some interface on the hub router that was in area 0.0.0.0, this
| would satisfy the requirements. Perhaps that would only apply to
interfaces
| that actually pass traffic and not to the loopback interface.
|
| Hmm...additional lab research is required, I think.
|
| Regards,
| John
|
| | Gang,
| |
| | Got this email today from Certification Zone. I'm not quite sure I
| | agree with the answer. Why doesn't answer 'C' meet the requirement?
| |
| | Chuck
| |
| | P.S. I don't have a Certification Zone subscription, otherwise I'd go
| read
| | Howard's explanation!
| |
| |
| | 7) This Week's CCIE Challenge Question
| | ==============================================
| | Which OSPF configuration fragment will cause abr1 to function as an
| | area border router?
| |
| | hostname abr1
| | int loop0
| | ip addr 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.248
| | int e0
| | ip addr 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0
| | int e1
| | ip addr 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
| |
| | a) router ospf 1
| | network 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 area 0.0.0.0
| | network 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 area 0.0.0.1
| |
| | b) router ospf 1
| | network 192.168.1.1 0.0.255.255 area 0.0.0.1
| | network 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 area 0.0.0.0
| |
| | c) router ospf 1
| | network 10.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 area 0.0.0.0
| | network 192.168.1.1 0.0.255.255 area 0.0.0.1
| | network 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 area 0.0.0.0
| |
| | d) router ospf 1
| | network 10.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 area 0.0.0.0
| | network 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 area 0.0.0.1
| | network 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 area 0.0.0.0
| |
| |
| | The answer to this week's question can be found at:
| | http://www.CertificationZone.com/QOW/1/ES/ccie-a.html
| |
| |
| | Chuck Church
| | CCNP, CCDP, MCNE, MCSE
| | Sr. Network Engineer
| | Magnacom Technologies
| | 140 N. Rt. 303
| | Valley Cottage, NY 10989
| | 845-267-4000 x218
| | **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:31:47 GMT-3