kiddsupreme wrote: Like me preface by saying I'm using dynamips to lab it up. The first issue I had was with the IE3.0 cabling setup. I had to switch some things around to make it work. This time, I used the IE4.0 cabling setup to make sure I had it like the book had it. I am trying to get basic connectivity between R1 and R4. Between the two routers are two switches, SW1 & SW4.
mikej412 wrote: By basic connectivity you mean you can't ping between R1 and R4? Since you mentioned you're using dynamips and you have 2 switches and are showing switch output -- are you using the a couple of emulated routers with NM-16ESW modules as your switches? I haven't tried it with the Feb 18th Dynagen/Dynamips but there were lots of layer 2 issues with the previous Dynagen/Dynamips when I tried simple switching configurations using the NM-16ESW modules -- the "hardware simulation" seems to need some work still.
kiddsupreme wrote: What I find interesting is if both routers (Say R1 and R3) are connected directly to the same switch, I have no issue in pinging between the two routers. But put the two 'switches' in the middle, and it doesn't want to work.
kiddsupreme wrote: The static route took care of that.
mikej412 wrote: Hum.... but the odds of being allowed to use static routes on the lab exam are probably slim to none. The R1 to R4 ethernet (if there are no loopback -- update source -- multi-hop issues) screams out for a next-hop-self. Double check BGPs handling of the the next hop value for the the multiple-access broadcast ethernet network. Also check for the Frame-Relay between R2 & R5..... Did you do the no synchronization? If R1 and R2 are iBGP peers and you're doing redistribution from BGP to EIGRP.... synchronization should be okay.