From: Gary Bradford (glbradford@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Jan 15 2000 - 21:46:29 GMT-3
I do know about the program and have ran it before even being at the lab. I
personally have it running on my home machine when I am not using it. SEDI
has created the program and gives it to anyone who wants it. If you run it
your machine dloads a block of signal and processes it for a couple hours,
then uploads it back and gets a new one. As I said, I do run it AT HOME. I
find it really amature to bring it to a professional enviroment.
BTW - YES, the Cisco lab RTP machines DO have internet access.... Makes you
wonder about using hotmail to open TAC cases :)
>From: Scott Morris <SMorris@tele-tech.com>
>Reply-To: Scott Morris <SMorris@tele-tech.com>
>To: "'ccielab@groupstudy.com'" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: Joke?
>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 15:59:08 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [208.242.122.8] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
>MHotMailBA4A2DEC008AD820F3BBD0F27A0838461; Sat Jan 15 13:13:21 2000
>Received: from localhost (mail@localhost)by groupstudy.com (8.9.3/8.9.3)
>with SMTP id QAA03288;Sat, 15 Jan 2000 16:59:33 GMT
>Received: by groupstudy.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 15 Jan 2000 16:59:33
>+0000
>Received: (from listserver@localhost)by groupstudy.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id
>QAA03284GroupStudy Mailer; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 16:59:33 GMT
>Received: from gods.tele-tech.com (gods.tele-tech.com [208.155.232.4])by
>groupstudy.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA03279GroupStudy Mailer; Sat,
>15 Jan 2000 16:59:32 GMT
>Received: by gods with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)id <CT4T1LCJ>;
>Sat, 15 Jan 2000 15:59:13 -0500
>From nobody@groupstudy.com Sat Jan 15 13:13:55 2000
>Message-ID: <AA530419FF38D31196930050048A474AEC9C2F@gods>
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
>Sender: nobody@groupstudy.com
>
>Wow... A joke is an interesting observation. Well, about the radio signal
>thing... Could it perhaps simply be the screen saver that's on there? We
>did that to a few people at work just for amusement. It "appears" to be
>receiving radio signals and analyzing them looking for aliens and other
>intelligent life...
>
>Now, being that you're going to take a technical test and assuming that you
>plan on passing such a test... I have to ask the obvious. If they TRULY
>are using the systems to REALLY search for aliens... just WHERE are they
>getting the radio signals from??? I mean, you'd need to have a pretty damn
>big antenna, and some sort of input device on the computer that you're
>dealing with, and a regular single-processor Intel system just isn't going
>to be cool enough to process the MAGNITUDE of information that antennas the
>size of SETI's brings in (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence).
>Sooo.... Ummm... Welcome to reality? ;)
>
>Now, back to the part of the CCIE program in general being a joke. The web
>site clearly tells you to prepare for everything, and at least the last
>time
>I looked at the things included on it they used words like "may" and
>"might"
>and "possible" and other things like that. So. It's difficult to say it's
>the tests' fault for the difficulty of some things on there.
>
>While the CCIE program tries to avoid being bleeding-edge in technology,
>they're certainly looking to add any proven technology into the exams where
>they can do so without adding new equipment, or creating any difficulty of
>not being able to remain objective in the exam. It's all fair game. The
>only reason ATM took so long to incorporate into the exam was the equipment
>itself had to be put in every lab so all would be equally objective.
>
>Remember, you can't prepare for everything, but know where to look things
>up
>and be good at thinking on your feet. I'm not trying to make this sound
>like a negative experience for everyone, but anything really is fair game.
>You will certainly not have any "rules" of engagement in consulting jobs
>you
>take on in real life, so what makes the test any different? It isn't a
>joke. It's a serious test, and I certainly applaud the people who make the
>scenarios and realize the difficulty of their job in remaining objective,
>yet keeping the level of the examination properly difficult enough to
>achieve the level of expertise they want to represent.
>
>The first time I took the exam, there were things on it that I didn't
>like... Even the second time there were things I didn't like. However, I
>could not fault the exam itself. I failed the first time because of my
>approach to the exam. My view always was that I can't know everything (I
>try to pretend to have a real life too!), and that's an accurate approach
>to
>the exam. Be technically familiar with the concepts of everything so you
>are not caught completely off-guard by something, but know where to look up
>the information you need, and put it into place as quickly as possible.
>THAT is what being an "expert" represents.
>
>It's not a joke. It's an exam, and a difficult one.
>
>Scott Morris, MCSE, CNE(3.x), CCDP, CCIE #4713, Security Specialization
>smorris@tele-tech.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gary Bradford [mailto:glbradford@hotmail.com]
>Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2000 1:43 PM
>To: emolden@earthlink.net; BHedlund@LifeTimeFitness.com
>Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: RE: [VPN]
>
>
>
>The CCIE program is becoming a joke. I don't mean that as saying it is
>easy, I mean that they are not providing enough information outlining what
>the rules of a given question are. I think if you go to the proctor and
>say
>
>I can configure this this way or this other way, what is it that you want,
>you should get a response.
>
>
>
>AND THE BIGGEST JOKE IS:
>
>At RTP they are using the CCIE lab PC's to look for aliens. Yes people, a
>big professional company like Cisco is running an application on all the
>test takers PC's that analyze radio telescope signals took for patterns
>that
>
>represent intelligence while people are taking the test. I can see people
>running this sort of thing at home on their pc's. Mabye on their office
>machine at work. BUT AT THE CISCO CCIE LAB. This is by far the most
>amature and unprofessional thing I could ever imagine them doing.
>
>
>
> >From: "Erik" <emolden@earthlink.net>
> >Reply-To: "Erik" <emolden@earthlink.net>
> >To: "Brad Hedlund" <BHedlund@LifeTimeFitness.com>
> >CC: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Subject: RE: [VPN]
> >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 23:27:34 -0500
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Received: from [208.242.122.8] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
> >MHotMailBA4945EF0022D820F3A7D0F27A0811AE1; Fri Jan 14 20:43:32 2000
> >Received: from localhost (mail@localhost)by groupstudy.com (8.9.3/8.9.3)
> >with SMTP id AAA24251;Sat, 15 Jan 2000 00:27:57 GMT
> >Received: by groupstudy.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 15 Jan 2000
>00:27:57
> >+0000
> >Received: (from listserver@localhost)by groupstudy.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id
> >AAA24247GroupStudy Mailer; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 00:27:57 GMT
> >Received: from snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net (snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net
> >[207.217.120.62])by groupstudy.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id
> >AAA24244GroupStudy Mailer; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 00:27:55 GMT
> >Received: from erikkim (dialup-209.246.210.18.Philadelphia1.Level3.net
> >[209.246.210.18])by snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP
>id
>
> >UAA07761;Fri, 14 Jan 2000 20:27:24 -0800 (PST)
> >From nobody@groupstudy.com Fri Jan 14 20:47:34 2000
> >Message-ID: <NDBBJBFOHLFLHAIBNLHJAEJJCBAA.emolden@earthlink.net>
> >X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
> >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
> >Importance: Normal
> >In-Reply-To:
><93DD2B9E9A8DD311933E00104B70CD690E7BD3@epserv101.ltfinc.net>
> >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
> >Sender: nobody@groupstudy.com
> >
> >Actually it was MOST DEFINATELY the test with VPN and did have 8 points,
> >including routing issues via the tunnel, etc.
> >
> >I would suggest filtering and thinking through your comments a little
> >before
> >sending out in the future.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Brad Hedlund [mailto:BHedlund@LifeTimeFitness.com]
> >Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 11:19 PM
> >To: 'Erik'; 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> >Subject: RE: [VPN]
> >
> >
> >
> >I dont see how you can have 8 points on basic GRE tunnels. ??
> >People are failing the test more than ever lately and crediting the VPN
> >stuff for it.
> >Dont be nieve Erik. Just because you or a friend got a test with with a
> >basic tunnel doesnt mean that was the test with VPN.
> >
> >I say, better be safe than sorry. Know encryption.
> >
> >-Brad
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > It is basic tunnel configurations, etc. No encryption.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > > Mosley, Arthur
> > > Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 10:19 PM
> > > To: 'Curtis Phillips '; 'zhencai '; 'ccielab@groupstudy.com '
> > > Subject: RE: [VPN]
> > >
> > >
> > > I think it's basic VPDN - (from CMTD course material/Cisco CD).
> > >
> > > Art
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Curtis Phillips
> > > To: zhencai; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Sent: 1/14/00 9:33 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [VPN]
> > >
> > > You raise a good point. I was under th eimpression that all of the
> > > encryption
> > > and ipsec was not going to be required.
> > >
> > > "zhencai" <zhencai@home.com> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I noticed that this topic had been discussed a little in this
> > > group, but
> > > I'm
> > > still kind of confused. I was wondering what I should know for the lab
> > > test(yeah, I know, everything, but...) Since VPN is quite a
> > > broad topic,
> > > I'd
> > > like to find out what you guys think.
> > > Thanks a lot.
> > >
> > > Zhen Cai
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:22:44 GMT-3