Re: CCIE RS Lab Grading Question

So you got the same subnets behind two different routers?

Draw a topology please

--
BR
Tony
Sent from my iPad
On 1 Apr 2013, at 16:53, Eduardo VC!zquez <evazquez_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Tony,
> 
> The routers were connected to the network in question, RX 10.1.1.x/24
> connected to RY 10.1.1.y/24.
> *
> *
> *Resolve connection problem.  The following command should show responses:*
> *
> *
> *RX# ping 10.1.1.y*
> 
> That is pretty much it.
> 
> If they said that it was a router on another network, then fine you need a
> routing protocol...but as it is if the ping is successful, I think good
> done with that moving on to the next one.
> 
> John,
> 
> I guess what I am wondering is, if this type of grading is in affect for
> the actual test.  the test I am talking about is only a
> practice assessment.
> 
> Thanks everyone for their insight.
> 
> e
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:02 AM, john matijevic
> <john.matijevic_at_gmail.com>wrote:
> 
>> If you feel you passed the lab exam, you can request a re-read.
>> I believe you need 80% on both Troubleshooting and 80% on
>> Configuration to pass the lab exam.
>> There should be no doubt whatsoever so if you feel you passed and got
>> working per the requirement, then I would go ahead and do the reread.
>> No need to explain yourself here, go towards Cisco and work it out with
>> them.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> John
>> On 4/1/13, Eduardo Vazquez <evazquez_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello Everyone,
>>> 
>>> I am on my 4th attempt at passing the lab exam and as an
>>> additional exercise I thought that I would try one of the assessments
>> that
>>> the 360 program offers.
>>> 
>>> It seems that I did not pass the troubleshooting section although I fixed
>>> the problems. Not to be too specific, but in a frame relay scenario they
>>> ask you to fix a problem in which one host can not ping the other.  I
>> fixed
>>> the problem so that I could ping the other side successfully, but I did
>> not
>>> get the points because I did not put a "broadcast" statement in the map.
>>> No where in the scenario did it say, "the command "ping x.x.x.x" should
>>> work AND make sure that you can run multicast over the link as well."
>> Only
>>> that "ping x.x.x.x should work."
>>> 
>>> I missed 3 questions in where I met the scenario's requirements. I did
>> miss
>>> one legitamately, but one as opposed to 4 is the difference between pass
>>> and fail.
>>> 
>>> I am not sure what to do about this should I always infer that even if I
>>> solve the problem described that there may be a hidden issue as well?
>>> 
>>> Should I address this with Cisco360?  I am a bit discouraged by this, as
>> I
>>> felt very confident about the material.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for any insight people can share.
>>> 
>>> Ed Vazquez
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> 
> 
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at: 
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net