From: Darren Cromer (dcromer@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Sep 05 2000 - 22:51:44 GMT-3
Troubleshooting is the easiest part, but the part that I found to be the most s
tressfull, and the easiest to screwup.
At this point in the lab, the CCIE # is YOURS TO LOSE, and its easy to make stu
pid mistakes like eraseing your whole config while doing a password recovery et
c. It's also very easy to spend to much time down the wrong path, chasing a red
herring.
I found that was by far under the most stress, about 1 hour into troubleshootin
g, with a seriously nonfunctional network and only 2 hours left to fix everythi
ng and pass.
Now the most peaceful part, was the last 15 minutes, after I had rechecked my n
etwork for the 5th time and it was running like a champ. I was tempted to ask
the proctor to grade it early, but I thought that I was tempting fate by doing
so.
Instead I just leaned back into my seat for those last 15 minutes closed my eye
s, and savored the feeling of being the greatest network guy alive <wink>. :)
When the proctor came to tell me time was up, he got a laugh of it because he
thought I was asleep. (true story)
Darren Cromer, CCIE #4384
At 12:27 PM 09/05/2000 , Kent 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