Hello,

The following I believe should solve this problem:
When redistributing EIGRP into OSPF, set the external metric type to type E1.

Any chance you can confirm in a lab environment that this is not true?

14. (QID:NE100) View the exhibit. Router B and router C are performing mutual redistribution between OSPF and EIGRP, and their default metrics are configured the same. Router D has equal cost paths to networks where both paths are not really equal cost.

For example, network 172.16.54.0 shows equal cost through both router B and router C, though in reality the cost is greater using router C. Other routers, though not shown, are connected to the 172.16.54.0 and 172.16.55.0 networks, and the same issues exist to those routers and the networks connected to them.

What can be done so that data will be routed along the most optimal path in the network?

When redistributing EIGRP into OSPF, set the external metric type to type E1.
Adjust the default metrics in router B and router C so that the values are different in each router.
Set the maximum number of equal cost paths to 1 in all routers.
None of these solutions will fix the problem. Migrate to a single dynamic routing protocol.

Correct Answer: None of these solutions will fix the problem. Migrate to a single dynamic routing protocol
Redistribute connected interfaces on router B and router C.

Hello,

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EIGRP#Feasi..._Condition as the correct answer is
The advertised distance of the neighbor must be less than the feasible distance of the current successor.

13. (QID:NB103) Which condition must be satisfied before an EIGRP neighbor can be considered a feasible successor?

The advertised distance of the neighbor must be equal to the feasible distance of the current successor.
The advertised distance of the neighbor must be less than or equal to the feasible distance of the current successor.
The advertised distance of the neighbor must be less than the feasible distance of the current successor.
The advertised distance of the neighbor must be greater than or equal to the feasible distance of the current successor.
The advertised distance of the neighbor must be greater than the feasible distance of the current successor.

Correct Answer: The advertised distance of the neighbor must be less than or equal to the feasible distance of the current successor.

Hello,

After looking at this question I think that perhaps the answer should include the network with the 20% load rather than the 45% load.  This is why I feel it should be so:

The neighbor sending the 65% inbound load needs to be brought down by 20% and the neighbor with the 20% load needs to have his load increased by 20%.  Right now hosts attempting to reach either network 10.10.1.32 or 10.10.1.48 are preferring the 65% load path through network 192.168.20.x rather than the 20% load path through network 192.168.30.x .  We need to tell these hosts that the cost to reach this path is higher over the 65% link than over the 20% link.  Your proposed solution would re balance traffic as 65% 20% with the load on the links reversed.

So the answer should include this statement:
access-list 50 permit 10.10.1.32 0.0.0.240

rather than the following statement which you indicate as correct:
access-list 50 permit 10.10.1.16 0.0.0.240

Question with your proposed solution below

23. (QID:NE115) View the exhibit. Currently the two eBGP links between AS100 and AS200 have an average inbound load of 65% and 20% respectively. After further investigation, traffic to 10.10.1.16/28 accounts for 45%, and traffic to 10.10.1.32/28 and to 10.10.1.48/28 each account for 20% of the inbound load. The BGP attributes are currently set at their default values in both autonomous systems.

If you want to influence how AS200 sends traffic to AS100, which eBGP configurations would you configure in AS100 to influence AS200 to use the eBGP links more evenly? (Choose two.)

route-map as_50 permit 10
match ip address 50
set metric 150
access-list 50 permit 10.10.1.16 0.0.0.240

neighbor 192.168.30.2 route-map as_50 out

neighbor 192.168.20.2 route-map as_50 out

route-map as_50 permit 10
match ip address 50
set metric 150
access-list 50 permit 10.10.1.32 0.0.0.240

Correct Answer:
route-map as_50 permit 10
match ip address 50
set metric 150
access-list 50 permit 10.10.1.16 0.0.0.240

neighbor 192.168.20.2 route-map as_50 out

Ok I am sorry but this makes no sense to me.  I actually would have chosen the two ip prefix-lists just out of process of elimination

172.16.x.x network = RIPv2 routes
10.x.x.x network = OSPF routes

first off the access-list 15 statement is a denial and it is attached to a route-map that is also a denial statement.  Followed by permit any statements.  Which means that you are denying the access-list from being denied but permitting all other traffic.  You can do that for sure but it won't accomplish any filtering.  So because of that I crossed it off the list.

access-list 15 deny 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.63
access-list 15 permit any
route-map redis-rip deny 10
match ip address 15
route-map redis-rip permit 20
router ospf 100
redistribute rip route-map redis-rip subnets

Second of all access-list 40 statement is a denial of OSPF routes and that denial statement is incorporated into the RIP process denying these routes from being advertised out by rip.  So uh... that defeats the purpose.  Its like saying RIP, you see these OSPF routes that you are trying to redistribute... well don't advertise them.

Question and answer below:
13. (QID:NE117) View the exhibit. A new TAC engineer comes to you for advice. The engineer wants  to configure RIPv2-OSPF two-way redistribution while avoiding routing loops. Which two additions to the router B1 configuration should the engineer make?

access-list 40 deny 172.16.1.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 40 permit any
router rip
redistribute ospf 100 metric 5
distribute-list 40 out ospf 100

ip prefix-list rip-to-ospf permit 10.1.1.8/25 ge 26 le 28
route-map redis-rip deny 20
match ip address prefix-list rip-to-ospf
router ospf 100
redistribute rip route-map redis-rip subnets

access-list 15 deny 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.63
access-list 15 permit any
route-map redis-rip deny 10
match ip address 15
route-map redis-rip permit 20
router ospf 100
redistribute rip route-map redis-rip subnets

ip prefix-list rip_routes permit 172.16.1.16/25 ge 26 le 28
route-map redis-ospf deny 10
match ip address prefix-list rip_routes
router rip
redistribute ospf 10 route-map redis-ospf subnets

Correct Answer:
access-list 40 deny 172.16.1.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 40 permit any
router rip
redistribute ospf 100 metric 5
distribute-list 40 out ospf 100

access-list 15 deny 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.63
access-list 15 permit any
route-map redis-rip deny 10
match ip address 15
route-map redis-rip permit 20
router ospf 100
redistribute rip route-map redis-rip subnets

The correct answer is supposed to be:
Correct Answer: RT3 has an IGP metric of 782 to reach 192.168.1.1

This answer makes no sense to me... perhaps you can help. 

In the routing table it states:

202.176.56.0 /24 [200/1782] via 192.168.1.1
200 = AD of IBGP
1782 = metric of IBGP correct?  Why is the answer not
RT3 has an IGP metric of 1782 to reach 202.176.56.0/24.

22. (QID:NF55) View the exhibit. Router RT3 discovers network 202.176.56.0 via BGP. Which one of these statements is true?

RT3 has an IGP metric of 1782 to reach 202.176.56.0/24.
RT3 has an IGP metric of 782 to reach 192.168.1.1.
RT3 has a BGP metric of 782 to reach 192.168.1.1.
RT1 advertised network 202.176.50.0/24 with a metric of 1000.
RT1 advertised network 202.176.50.0/24 with a metric of 782.
RT3 is directly connected to RT1 using subnet 192.168.1.0.

Correct Answer: RT3 has an IGP metric of 782 to reach 192.168.1.1

Hello,

For the following question below you stated the correct answer is:
1. Subnets of 172.32.0.0/22 do not exist in the BGP table.

However they would exist in the BGP table because the aggregate-address command works similarly to the network command in BGP.  It injects these routes into the BGP table but not the routing table.  the problem is that there would not be a ">" mark next to those routes indicating that they are the best routes because BGP cannot find these routes in the routing table propagated by an IGP. 

Thus the correct answer is:
5. The BGP command no synchronization is missing.

Please correct thanks!

Question:
59. (QID:NF58) During BGP configuration on a router that has peered with other BGP speakers, the BGP command "aggregate-address 172.32.0.0 255.255.252.0" is issued. However, the peers do not receive this aggregate network in BGP advertisements. Also, the router does not have this aggregate network in its BGP table. Which option indicates a possible reason this command did not cause the router to advertise the aggregate network to its peers?

1. Subnets of 172.32.0.0/22 do not exist in the BGP table.
2. The BGP command no auto-summary is missing.
3. Interface NULL 0 is likely shutdown.
4. The IGP running on this router does not have network 172.32.0.0/22 installed.
5. The BGP command no synchronization is missing.
6. The next hop IP address must be a loopback address.

This question is for the moderator(s) but any input would be great.  I'm wondering if its OK to use external URL references
for images and configurations when posing questions.  What I'm curious about is not so much Cisco white papers/RFCs etc
(I have seen these used before) but rather diagrams and configurations I have created in my own lab that relate to CCNP
content.
Thanks

YES, I passed my CCNA!!  The purpose of this post is to share how I prepared, and to share what strategy worked for me.  Good luck to all those studying.

I took 3 main approaches, getting a good text book, doing the hardware labs, and thoroughly testing myself with practice exams.

1)Textbook-I recommend getting Todd Lammle's CCNA book.  It is thorough, and I felt he covered all topics that I actually saw come exam day.  And do the questions at the end of the chapters.  I read it twice to make sure I got it all.

2)Labs-Either get some of your own equipment, or buy a hardware simulator. I bought Wendel Odom's hardware sim, came with 250 labs, and was $150. I did all 250 labs, and felt comfortable on exam day as a result.  Kind of pricey, but not compared to real equipment.

3)Practice Exams-This step is key to being able to finish all the CCNA questions before your exam time is up. Even when you understand the topics, the questions can seem overwhelming on exam day if you have not been practicing.  I bought the exam simulator from myPowerPass (mypowerpass.com).  This simulator is an excellent way to get a feel for the exam and for the types of questions you will encounter. It is under $20, and doing their practice exams allowed me to know when I was really ready to schedule my CCNA exam. 

Best of luck.

I passed my ICND1 today  after 2 attempts of not passing it.

CCENT certified. Few days onto studying for ICND2.

Very happy person! All I can say is if you study your labs you should be okay. There were a couple of redistributiion questions that I stumbled on....and a question on the configuration of a GRE tunnel that was part of my preparation...and a question on DSL PPPoe.


Thanks for the help H2P!