Brocade 170-010 - Brocade Certified vRouter Engineer
vyatta@training:~$ show system commit
0 2013-05-03 21:07:54 by root via boot-config-loader
1 2013-05-03 00:05:32 by vyatta via cli
2 2013-05-02 23:15:23 by vyatta via cli
3 2013-04-08 17:57:48 by root via boot-config-loader
4 2013-03-12 18:08:45 by vyatta via cli
5 2013-01-22 22:56:04 by vyatta via cli
6 2012-11-04 02:36:36 by root via boot-config-loader
7 2012-10-12 16:15:36 by vyatta via cli
8 2012-10-11 16:23:08 by vyatta via cli
9 2012-09-10 18:51:06 by vyatta via cli
10 2012-09-04 23:56:28 by vyatta via cli
11 2012-08-31 23:25:35 by vyatta via cli
12 2012-08-31 23:08:05 by vyatta via cli
13 2012-08-31 23:07:32 by vyatta via cli
14 2012-08-31 23:06:56 by vyatta via cli
15 2012-08-31 03:38:53 by vyatta via cli
16 2012-08-31 03:37:15 by vyatta via cli
17 2012-08-31 03:03:53 by vyatta via cli
18 2012-06-22 04:58:47 by vyatta via cli
19 2012-06-20 19:48:08 by vyatta via cli
vyatta@training:~$
Which two configuration elements are required in a source NAT masquerade rule? (Choose two.)
vyatta@vyatta:~$ show interfaces
Codes: S - State, L - Link, u - Up, D - Down, A - Admin Down
Interface IP Address S/L Description
--------- ---------- --- -----------
eth0 172.24.42.51/24 u/u
eth1 192.168.101.1/24 u/u
eth2 192.168.12.1/24 u/u
eth3 192.168.13.1/24 A/D
lo 127.0.0.1/8
::1/128
vyatta@vyatta:~$
Based on the output, what is the problem with eth3?
vyatta@vyatta:~$ show ip route
Codes: K - kernel route, C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, O - OSPF,
I - ISIS, B - BGP, > - selected route, * - FIB route
S>* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.1.1.1, eth0
C>* 10.1.1.0/30 is directly connected, eth1
C>* 10.2.2.0/30 is directly connected, eth2
S 10.1.2.0/24 [1/0] via 10.1.1.1, eth1
S>* 10.1.2.0/24 [100/0] via 10.2.2.1, eth2
O 10.1.2.0/24 [110/20] via 10.2.2.1, eth2
C 127.0.0.0/8 is directly connected, lo
vyatta@vyatta:~$
Your router has received a packet destined for host 10.1.2.42.
Which line from the routing table shows how the router will forward the packet?
vyatta@VYA1:~$ show ip route ospf
O 192.168.12.0/24 [110/1] is directly connected, eth2, 00:07:36
O 192.168.13.0/24 [110/1] is directly connected, eth3, 00:07:36
O *> 192.168.23.0/24 [110/2] via 192.168.12.2, eth2, 00:05:05
*> [110/2] via 192.168.13.3, eth3, 00:05:05
O 192.168.101.0/24 [110/1] is directly connected, eth1, 00:07:36
O *> 192.168.128.0/24 [110/2] via 192.168.12.2, eth2, 00:05:53
O *> 192.168.129.2/32 [110/11] via 192.168.12.2, eth2, 00:05:53
O *> 192.168.130.2/32 [110/11] via 192.168.12.2, eth2, 00:05:53
O *> 192.168.131.2/32 [110/11] via 192.168.12.2, eth2, 00:05:53
O *> 192.168.160.0/24 [110/2] via 192.168.13.3, eth3, 00:05:05
O *> 192.168.161.3/32 [110/11] via 192.168.13.3, eth3, 00:05:05
O *> 192.168.162.3/32 [110/11] via 192.168.13.3, eth3, 00:05:05
O *> 192.168.163.3/32 [110/11] via 192.168.13.3, eth3, 00:05:05
vyatta@VYA1:~$ show ip route summary
IP routing table name is Default-IP-Routing-Table(0)
IP routing table maximum-paths is 8
Route Source Networks
connected 7
static 1
ospf 9
Total 17
FIB 9
vyatta@VYA1:~$
Based on the output, what is the reason not all OSPF routes have been added to the FIB?
Which command disables hello packets on an OSPF interface?
