Housekeeping Notice: No Config Labs for this Book Part

By certskills September 6, 2015 14:44

In this blog, some menu categories do not happen to have any posts associated with them. That’s just coincidence regarding what topics I’ve happened to choose over the many years of writing this blog. However, for Config Lab posts, I get an occasional question like “where are the config labs for this part? I don’t see any.” Turns out that some book parts or chapters do not happen to include CLI configuration topics, so there are no Config Lab posts. Here are the Book parts that currently have no Config Labs with the two books for the CCNA 200-301 exam:

  • CCNA 200-301 Volume 1 Part 1 (Fundamentals)
  • CCNA 200-301 Volume 1 Part 8 (Wireless)
  • CCNA 200-301 Volume 2 Part 4 (Architecture)
  • CCNA 200-301 Volume 2 Part 5 (Programmability)
Answers: Basic OSPFv3
A: A Port Security Question
By certskills September 6, 2015 14:44
Write a comment


  1. Wole June 13, 06:14

    I am new here. There seems to be so much information and i don’t know where to get hands on labs question. and help on how to go about int this blog?

    Reply to this comment
    • Chris June 15, 17:22

      Hi – Glad you came here to look around.
      In the upper right there is a search box. You can type anything in there and find what you are looking for.
      You can also hover over the Blue Menu bar and view the the drop down menus. The “Hands On” menu will have the Lab categories and once you pick a category you can search or sort them.

      Reply to this comment
    • certskills Author June 19, 09:04

      Let me add my welcome as well, Wole! Enjoy.

      Reply to this comment
  2. joshua hurley August 5, 19:24

    not exactly sure what to do on this page is this supposed to be a lab we can do or just a place for blogs? i would like a lab to use

    Reply to this comment
    • certskills Author August 10, 12:47

      Hi Joshua,
      The books group chapters into parts. Some book parts happen to cover concept-only topics, so there aren’t any labs. This blog post is a placeholder to point out the Book parts for the current books for which we don’t have any of this style of lab (Config Labs).

      Go to the menu and choose “Hands On… Config Lab 200-301” to find the Config Labs that do exist.

      Reply to this comment
  3. Vicente Torres March 11, 23:44

    Hi Wendell, I have some doubts about Vol2- part 5 topics, and I’m glad we have this space to ask you.

    About Configuration Management Tools (ie. Ansible, Puppet and Chef). Are they intended for old Cisco hardware instead of newer hardware with SDN/controller support?

    Do SDN/Controller tools (ie. ACI, DNA) include their own Configuration Management Tools? or should they be complemented with such tools as Ansible, Puppet and/or Chef?

    Thanks in advance.

    Reply to this comment
    • Wendell Odom March 14, 15:48

      Hi Vicente,
      Glad you like the blog comment area!
      Config Management tools aren’t so much for old vs. SDN for new, but that does tend to be the case. But it’s reasonable to be a bit confused, because many network automation tools exist and you have to learn quite a bit to sift through them. It’s more about the operational model. For instance.
      Old gear, for decades, works via humans performing device-by-device (aka distributed) configuration. Config Management tools help when using that model. The SDN models used by Cisco, for instance, ACI, and SDA which uses the DNA-C controller), they use a model in which humans do not perform device-by-device distributed configuration. So a Config Management tool is simply the wrong tool. Those cases also happen to be newer as for age in the marketplace.

      So, I just looked at your second question, and I may have already answered it? Short answer is no, there’s no need for a Config Management tool, because the controller configures the distributed devices.

      Hope this helps,

      Reply to this comment
      • Vicente Torres April 1, 01:50

        I just wanted to thank you for all your answers during these months of preparation. I just passed my exam today!!! I went out of the testing center with a great smiley face and feelings!! This was such a great experience!!!

        Reply to this comment
        • Wendell Odom April 4, 17:05

          You’re quite welcome, Vicente! I knew you wold do well – your questions showed how much hard work you were doing. Congratulations!!

          Reply to this comment
  4. Vicente Torres March 11, 23:57

    Hello Wendell, here with another doubt, now about Vol2-part 3-QoS.

    I understood that QoS is manageable on enterprise’s devices and with the aid of WAN Service providers for private communications. And that traffic on the internet ignores QoS markings, so such QoS config effort made in the enterprise would be useless if traffic goes to the internet?. Is that right? Thinking mostly about the recent COVID pandemic that made all of us make intensive use of video conference tools such as Cisco webex, Zoom, MS Teams, etc. Which would benefit of QoS, but they all flow through the internet to reach endpoints in the enterprises LANs and our homes while in home-office. How can these tools benefit of QoS if internet does not provide such features?

    Thank you.

    Reply to this comment
    • Wendell Odom March 14, 15:55

      Hi Vicente,
      For the first half of your paragraph, the short answer is that you are correct. Imagine a router in the Internet at some ISP. It has the ability to see and react to QoS markings (specifically DSCP), but it has no ability to trust that such a marking is legitimate, accurate about the traffic, or to know what markings different well-intentioned customers might have used. It’s like having a special traffic lane on the highway, with no way to know who is allowed to use it at the current time.

      Second half… If an enterprise wants the benefits of QoS for any traffic, video conferencing included, then their WANs need to use something other than the Internet. They don’t benefit from QoS with the traffic flowing over the Internet because the Internet doesn’t provide QoS benefits that differentiate between one type of packet vs. another. It’s that simple. That doesn’t mean interactive video doesn’t work over the Internet – clearly it does – it just has worse performance vs. the same traffic under the same conditions, but over a private WAN that has QoS applied.

      Reply to this comment
View comments

Write a comment

Leave a Reply to Wole Cancel reply