From: Derek Fage (DerekF@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Jul 23 1999 - 14:33:05 GMT-3
Congratulations Barry !
Unfortunately, although I made it through the troubleshooting, I never
gained the required number of points.
The annoying thing is that there was nothing really that I could not do, but
I made a number of silly mistakes that cost me valuable points. If there is
one thing I would say, it's READ THE QUESTIONS CAREFULLY, then read them
again to ensure that you read them correctly.
I lost a lot of time on the first morning when I was half way through
addressing my routers and discovered a sentance that I had missed that meant
that I had to change my numbering scheme. Make your diagram with IP numbers
on BEFORE you start configuring - it's easier to erase a few pencil
addresses that reconfigure routers. I made a huge error when I read a
statement telling us to use subinterfaces on F/R spoke routers as to NOT use
them. This was due to a lot of the practice I have done I've tried to use a
mix, as it involves more configuration and other issues when using physical
interfaces as opposed to sub-interfaces. Assumption is the mother of all
cock-ups !!!
So I ended up 7 points short in the end - I probably lost all of them in
simple configuration errors through not reading / comprehending it.
Anyway, I feel that having done the lab, I am confident that I will pass
next time - a painful lesson in concentrating more when reading the
questions will ensure that it does not happen again ! I'll be calling cisco
again to reschedule.
Derek...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Poston, Barry [SMTP:BPoston@Aegonusa.com]
> Sent: 23 July 1999 08:00
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Cc: 'fningham@worldnet.att.net'; 'Derek Fage'; 'judith7304@aol.com'
> Subject: CCIE #4932
>
> To all,
>
> This message is somewhat wordy, but for those who want to hear about the
> experience of taking the lab exam, what follows is how I saw it.
>
> By some miracle, I hereby report that I have been awarded CCIE #4932!
> Okay, not quite on the same scale as the parting of the Red Sea, but there
> must have been some divine intervention! I have to agree with those who
> have reported of late that the exam doesn't so much cover topics in great
> detail, it's just that you don't know what might be on the test. It's not
> so much the depth of your knowledge, but the breadth of that knowledge.
> And, being able to locate in the manuals/CD that which you're not so
> familiar with. I prefer hardcopy to the CD, and I grabbed the manuals
> that
> I wanted, and used them. As for the CD, don't rely on the search
> function,
> know where a topic is, drill down to that specific page(manual), and then
> do
> a 'find' for what you want. It's not too difficult, FR is book IV, IP is
> book V, IPX/Apple is book VI. Know these, and know how to find them on
> the
> CD, without using the search.
>
> This was my first attempt at the lab, and to be honest, I probably would
> have been satisfied with just making it to Day 2. I felt I had a good
> background of experience, but there was so much that I just didn't know
> like
> the back of my hand, because I don't see it every day on the job. Like
> ATM, OPSF, Appletalk, FrameRelay.....
>
> But, I have to give credit where credit is due. I do have 7 years
> experience working on Cisco routers, all models, and lots of IP, IPX, and
> SNA. So, that helped. Secondly, I studied and studied Caslow's text. I
> expect to use this book as an on-the-job reference. Lastly, I took the
> BRS
> class from ARS, Ltd., instructors Fred Ingham and James Park. While the
> class couldn't prepare me for everything I needed to know, it did give me
> a
> feel for what the exam would be like, certain things that I needed to
> know,
> and most importantly, where my weaknesses were. I seriously don't think I
> would have passed without this class.
>
> Unfortunately, I made a scheduling error that left me wondering if I was
> properly prepared. I passed the written in April, and scheduled the lab
> as
> soon as I could, San Jose on 7/21-22. I took the ARS class in June, and
> wished that I could have taken the lab then, because I was primed. But, I
> had scheduled a family vacation from 6/25-7/10, and I'll admit, I lost a
> lot
> during that time off. So, between 7/11 and 7/21, I did some serious
> freshening up, but I still did not feel that I was as prepared as I should
> be. I figured, "hardly anyone passes on the first try, so this will be a
> good experience to build on for the next attempt."
>
> So, Day 1 in San Jose, and you need at least 30 out of 45 to continue.
> From
> some of the past postings to this list, it had appeared that after the day
> was done, you could stick around into the evening, and find out if you had
> enough points to continue. Not so, for this group! There were about 7 of
> us testing, and about 7 others on their second day; that is, finding out
> if
> there was to be a second day. I don't know how many of those continued
> into
> day 2, but I do know that 3 of them earned their CCIE.
>
> As for my group of 7, none of us knew if we would return in the morning to
> good news or bad news. But, it meant that we all had to hit the books,
> and
> get to bed early. That's one part of the exam that I wish could be
> changed.
> It seems unfair to hold everyone in suspense like that. So, we all
> returned
> the next morn, hoping to see the Day 2 book on your desk. If it's not
> there, you didn't make it. If it is, you plug on, but you still don't
> know
> how many points you have scored to that point, just that you must have had
> at least 30. As for me, I felt that I was right around the magic number,
> either just below, or just above. Either way, a quite precarious
> position;
> you're either out, or don't really have enough points to carry you through
> the next part.
>
> At lunchtime of Day 2, there were only 2 of us still in the game. The
> other
> 5 had not scored the minimum 30 for Day 1. At this point, we were to come
> back from lunch to find out if our scores for the morning were enough to
> keep us going. Some on this list have stated that one needs 30 out of 45
> on
> the first day, 60 out of the cumulative 80 through Day 2 morning, and then
> whatever you can score from the 20 points available in the afternoon
> troubleshooting. That wasn't quite that way for us. Our possible scores
> were 45, 30, and 25, so I'm not sure what the minimums were. But, when we
> returned from lunch, we two were still on course. We still didn't know
> how
> many points we had accumulated, though.
>
> At this point, the proctor has inserted multiple bugs/errors/whatever into
> your network. Find, correct, and document them all, and you pass. I feel
> this is the easiest part of the test; or, another way of saying that is,
> if
> you've made it this far, you should be able to close it out. If you
> cannot
> troubleshoot issues on a network that you created, then you definitely
> need
> more time in your study lab.
>
> So, we both passed. My scores were 36 for Day 1, 25 for morning 2, and
> all
> 25 for the Troubleshooting, for a total of 86. I don't know the other
> gentleman's name, because he finished before me, but I'm happy for him,
> and
> ecstatic for myself!
>
> For those aspiring to achieve this certification, it can be done! I did
> it!
>
> (Derek, my thoughts are with you. You won't see this until after Day 2,
> but
> here's hoping you are #493x!)
>
>
> Barry Poston CCIE #4932 (That feels good!)
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:21:42 GMT-3