You started out strong with Worchester but missed Boston entirely. I’ve provided really detailed feedback below to help you get back on the right track. Pay close attention to my feedback on item number 10, do not use images of the configurations in your next submission please.1. Worchester Subnet: Great, you have a well put together table and it includes all the required information from the assignment instructions. 2. Subnet Design: Awesome, this is a good design choice and you’re right about why you might chose to go this way. Considering that you have access to the entire /16 you can easily use a /24 to break out the subnets. You might consider having the third octet match the VLAN number to make troubleshooting between layers two and three a bit easier.3. Routing Protocol Choice: This section is interesting, I worry that you missed the point of the assignment for Boston. I’m looking here for you to chose an IGP solution and implement it. It seems like you have selected a bit of all three of the common IPv4 IGPs. For full credit, select one and justify your selection.4. Peerlinks: In this section, I’m looking to see how you’ve documented your peerlinks. I’m not going to be particular about how you do this but I would need to see the addresses, subnet masks, and next hops of all three routers peer links in some easily understandable format.5. Advertisements: I’m looking for two things in this section. I’m looking for you to provide correct network statements for each of the three Boston routers in your chosen IGP. I’m also looking for you to authenticate peer advertisements. Looking at your EIGRP section you’ve included the same network statement for all three routers which will ensure that traffic routes incorrectly for R2 and R3. Pay careful attention to the downstream networks on R2 and R3.6. Summarization: I started to provide feedback on this above, but I’m looking here for you to correctly summarize each of the three Boston routers. R1 should be a summary of the entire /16 (which you got right) but R2 and R3 should summarize in such a way that it reflects the downstream networks only. Word of caution on using RIPv2, it is only a good choice in very specialized circumstances.7: Default Route: In this section I’m interested in how you will route traffic outside of the network. For each of the three Boston routers, they should have a default route in their routing table. You can do this manually or using your IGP.8. Topology: Half credit on this one, you’ve taken a stab at this with the packet tracer diagram of Worchester and part of Boston. For full credit show me both Boston and Worchester and focus on what topology improvements might be made to Boston to strengthen the network.9. Overall Formatting: Half credit on this item. You have a reasonably professional look to the document but syntactically there are issues here. Try reading the document out loud or to another person and you’ll see that conversationally it is difficult to understand your discussion sections. I’m not looking for you to be an English major on this but I’d like for the document to be easy to understand and comprehend when read. 10. Sources Cited: Half credit, you have followed IEEE styling in your works cited page and in the internal citations but you have a source 11 in the images, you never cite source 3, and your fourth source almost seems like a joke to make sure that I’m reading this thoroughly. Be extremely careful with these images, of the configurations. With the  I’m inclined to believe that you might have taken this from some other source material. Since you’ve not received any credit on these Boston routing sections I’m not going to make an issue of this but in your next submission please do not use images of the configurations.I took off full credit on 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7; half credit on 8, 9, and 10.
Free up your time by getting your academic assignments done faster- without compromising on quality!
Custom Academic Papers
100% Original, Plagiarism Free, Customized to your instructions!
You started out strong with Worchester but missed Boston en
Our Service Charter
- Professional & Expert Writers: Solving Essays only hires the best. Our writers are specially selected and recruited, after which they undergo further training to perfect their skills for specialization purposes. Moreover, our writers are holders of masters and Ph.D. degrees. They have impressive academic records, besides being native English speakers.
- Top Quality Papers: Our customers are always guaranteed papers that exceed their expectations. All our writers have 5+ years of experience. This implies that all papers are written by individuals who are experts in their fields. In addition, the quality team reviews all the papers before sending them to the customers.
- Plagiarism-Free Papers: All papers provided by us are written from scratch. Appropriate referencing and citation of key information are followed. Plagiarism checkers are used by the Quality assurance team and our editors just to double-check that there are no instances of plagiarism.
- Timely Delivery: Time wasted is equivalent to a failed dedication and commitment. Solving Essays is known for timely delivery of any pending customer orders. Customers are well informed of the progress of their papers to ensure they keep track of what the writer is providing before the final draft is sent for grading.
- Affordable Prices: Our prices are fairly structured to fit all groups. Any customer willing to place their assignments with us can do so at very affordable prices. In addition, our customers enjoy regular discounts and bonuses.
- 24/7 Customer Support: At Solving Essays, we have put in place a team of experts who answer all our customer inquiries promptly. The best part is the ever-availability of the team. Customers can make inquiries anytime.