From: Barry Mersmann (bmersmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Sep 05 2000 - 16:02:58 GMT-3
Regarding troubleshooting 50-60 problems...
Or, is it a case where they've made 50-60 changes, but only some of
them are actually causing problems?
I can't imagine the CCIE troubleshooting section being a typographical
editing session. The CCIE hasn't gained it's status by failing to
TEST people.
Is it just me or is this troubleshooting in brussels question getting
awfully close to borderline NDA?
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Kevin Baumgartner
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 1:35 PM
To: Kent
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: troubleshooting in brussels
I find it hard to believe there are that many problems.
Since there any only a total of 25 points for the troubleshooting
this means each answer is worth only a 1/2 a point.
I guess it's possible but It seems like a marking nightmare
for the proctor.
Or is it a total of 50-60 problems and you need to get 25 right.
But since I haven't yet made it to the troubleshooting I am
only guessing here.
Kevin
At 09:27 AM 9/5/00 -0700, you wrote:
>I was told the trouble shooting is the easiest part,
>but if like what you guys saying, correct 50-60 wrong
>ip address in 2 hours, what's point of Cisco for doing
>this?
>So the CCIEs are guys can type faster than CCNPs?
>I have not got my CCIE, but I have seen the lab, from
>what I can tell, CCIE stuff is pretty stupid if
>consider the reputation it has. I have been working
>with many engineers and some of them just could not
>get CCIE after many tries, but I can say not any of
>them is not as good as the guys who passed at their
>first try. I know this is just claiming, because
>people just pay for the title, this is the reality, so
>we have to bend to the world which is ruled by stupid
>rules.
>
>
>
>
>--- Kevin Gannon <kevin@gannons.net> wrote:
> > I also did brussels about 3 months ago now and never
> > got to day two.
> > The proctor IMHO was less than helpful in the long
> > walk back to the
> > exam room he asked when did I plan on comming back
> > :( and then
> > he simply said that he hadnt time to go thorugh all
> > my mistakes
> > yet told me a did very well in DLSW which killed me
> > as I am very weak
> > in that area.
> >
> > I knew I wasnt going to day two but he could have
> > given me some
> > pointers. I was so annoyed I didnt go into day two
> > to try and redo
> > the configs as I felt that he was no help then and
> > wouldnt have been
> > any help the next day.
> >
> > I am still trying to get the motivation to go back
> > and start studying again
> > I havent looked at my rack since then.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kevin
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Jesmond Psaila <jpsaila@prudent.net.au>
> > To: fixi mixi <mfixi@hotmail.com>;
> > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2000 2:43 AM
> > Subject: RE: troubleshooting in brussels
> >
> >
> > > Derek,
> > >
> > > At lease you had the luxury of the proctor going
> > through the first day lab
> > > with you in detail.
> > >
> > > In Sydney the morning after your first day you get
> > told yes or no. I tried
> > > to extract information out of him to know what I
> > did wrong but no success.
> > >
> > > Everybody out there what is the ruling on this,
> > what level of feedback are
> > > you entitled to, It makes it very frustrating not
> > to know what questions
> > you
> > > got wrong or right.
> > >
> > >
> > > jesmond
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> > [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > > fixi mixi
> > > Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2000 11:53 PM
> > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: troubleshooting in brussels
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > This is the story of my lab exam.
> > > I flew to Brussels feeling no chance on the exam
> > next day. My goal was to
> > > make it to the 2nd day.
> > > So I went there on the next morning feeling not
> > particularly excited
> > knowing
> > > the final result anyway. Then we got the questions
> > handed out. I looked
> > > through it and I didnt find it too difficult for
> > the first sight. At that
> > > moment I got excited. Can I make it for the 2nd
> > day? So I did my best. At
> > > the end of the day I felt that I wouldn't be
> > surprised if I was told to go
> > > on next day too.
> > > The proctor graded our work and called us one by
> > one. We went trough
> > > together on my configs. The proctor asked me
> > questions pointing out my
> > > mistakes. Since he didnt asked me serious
> > questions I assumed that I made
> > > the first day. My assumtion was right. He said
> > that we will see eachother
> > > the next day. He didnt tell me points.
> > >
> > > Next morning I went there knowing that I reached
> > my goal, the 2nd day. The
> > > questions were not too difficult again, so I
> > thought I have even chance to
> > > make it for the troubleshooting? At lunch time I
> > was pretty confident that
> > I
> > > can go for troubleshooting. And I thought, what is
> > troubleshooting, there
> > is
> > > nothing to it, a few passwd recovery, playing with
> > vlans on the cat, a few
> > > ip address changes, intf shutdowns, ospf area
> > changes and it works. So it
> > > was so. After lunch it turned out that 3 of us can
> > go for ts.
> > > There was only 2 hours for that. I started. Two
> > pwd recovery, seems
> > nothing.
> > > I changed few params on the cat which were crucial
> > and i even changed back
> > > the hostname. I thought it was important. In fact
> > it was not. I went for
> > the
> > > routers. I spent a few minutes with changing
> > nonsense (hostnames,
> > > passwds...). Then I thought lets make the
> > connectivity work. I realised
> > that
> > > they changed lots of ip addresses. In fact they
> > changed almost all of
> > them.
> > > I looked at ospf. It was totally messed up.
> > Redistribution between routing
> > > protocols? Filters for redistribution? Nothing
> > worked. I didnt even dare
> > to
> > > look at bgp.
> > > So frankly speaking I had to reconfigure the whole
> > IP staff with routing.
> > I
> > > had to reconfigure the whole framerelay stuff.
> > Delete subintfs which
> > > involves to reboot your routers again. (3mins)
> > >
> > > IPX and Apple were also in bad shape. None of my
> > previously configured IPX
> > > addresses and apple cable- ranges were correct.
> > ISDN needed
> > reconfiguration
> > > too. I was correcting ip ipx apple addresses
> > during this two hours but i
> > did
> > > not get to the end.
> > >
> > > So I failed because of the ts. During this 2 hour
> > I corrected at least 50
> > > errors all together and I see at least 20 more
> > (not counting stupid
> > passwds
> > > on vty and hostnames)
> > >
> > > At the beginning of the ts i thought that i will
> > be given some tricky
> > erros
> > > which need debugging and correct the problem. It
> > was not so. The errors
> > were
> > > obvious. They didnt test your knowledge. They
> > tested your typing ability
> > an
> > > copy-paste ability. They tested how fast you can
> > type. I was quite upset
> > > about this stupidity and unfairness. This is not a
> > question of knowledge,
> > > this is just to make the passing rate to 15%.
> > >
> > > At the end of ts i asked the proctor what they
> > grade on ts. He was
> > preaching
> > > me about some sophisticated methodology how to
> > approach the problem etc,
> > and
> > > he told me that basically they grade connectivity
> > and anyway he is new at
> > > proctoring on the ccie lab. Yes, i sad, but in my
> > case it ment that i
> > almost
> > > had to do the same thing in two hours which i was
> > doung for two days
> > before.
> > > I wanted to ask him if he think that the ts is for
> > human beings, but i did
> > > not want to ruin my chances for the nex try so i
> > kept my mouth shut and
> > > tried to smile.
> > >
> > > Later on i talked to the other proctor (there were
> > 2 groups taking the
> > exam,
> > > from 12 people only 1 passed) and I asked him how
> > many errors they put all
> > > together in one persons config. 50-60, he
> > answered. I had more than that.
> > >
> > > Final conclusion. My proctor was not willing to
> > tell me (not only me) how
> > > many points i had reached in the different
> > sessions.
>=== message truncated ===
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:24:52 GMT-3