From: Mark Salmon (masalmon@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Feb 27 2001 - 17:51:37 GMT-3
I am less concerned about the knowledge of the lab monitor as I was with the me
ss
there. I wasted about 3 hours trying to patch stuff in the back and unfortunat
ely,
there was not enough rj45 on station 1 to make that possible.
When I was there in September last year, I told the lab engineer that one route
r was
faulty on rack 1. When I returned in February, the bad router was still there.
Due
to the patch mess, I was not able to do as much scenarios as I would have liked
to.
It is not all bad as they did have a couple new scenarios that ware great., Ho
wever,
the routers in the scenarios were not available in the rack, so I had to improv
ise
again wasting time as I had to steal routers from rack 1 and use them in rack 2
.
The main reason why I went there is to practice ISDN and voice and truthfully,
I was
able to do a boatload of ISDN, however, I was hampered in my ability to set up
some IP
routing protocols to really test my ISDN scenarios. My .02.
Andrew Short wrote:
> That's interesting, because I was speaking exclusively from my experience
> in the IUPUI Lab. However, I can certainly see where someone would walk
> away with that opinion.
>
> My tac is that you really have to know what you are doing to begin with.
> At one point, I asked the lab monitor if the CAt5k would do ISL, 802.1q,
> or both...and he told me that he had NO idea what I was talking about, and
> didn't know what "trunking" was. Isn't work study a great thing? =-)
>
> However, when I noted to the monitor that I required another fiber patch
> cable in order to run connections through LS1010, he chased one down
> quickly and before long I was dutifully WASTING MY TIME!!! configuring
> LANE. =-)
>
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Mark Salmon wrote:
>
> > Good idea. I have used 2 practice labs. IUPUI in Indianapolis (stay away
from
> > that one, it is messy and have non working equipment). University Of
> > California Extension Santa Cruz (excellent equipment, and you are not allow
ed to
> > mess with the cables at the back) in Santa Clara just like in the real lab.
The
> > lab engineer is a great guy too.
> >
> > Andrew Short wrote:
> >
> > > I would look into a 2-3 day stint at one of the Cisco practice labs.
> > > They're $500 a day, very realistic rack (from a testing standpoint),
> > > completely hands on, and the freedom to do just about anything you want t
o
> > > do with the equipment.
> > >
> > > I was critical of some things in the there until I took the real lab and
> > > saw how close it was. They give you scenarios to work on but you can use
> > > those or bring your own.
> > >
> > > Anyone else use the practice labs?
> > >
> > > On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Chuck Church wrote:
> > >
> > > > Anyone,
> > > >
> > > > I'm contemplating renting a simulator for a month, with my lab bei
ng
> > > > about 6 weeks away. Does anyone have one they'd like to rent or know o
f a
> > > > place renting them? I've been in contact with Merge Technologies -
> > > > http://www.mergetech.com/new2000af_description.htm , but I'm a little
> > > > hesitant about the $350/month price. Is there anything cheaper that
> > > > supports S/T interfaces?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Chuck Church
> > > > CCNP, CCDP, MCNE, MCSE
> > > > Sr. Network Engineer
> > > > Magnacom Technologies
> > > > 140 N. Rt. 303
> > > > Valley Cottage, NY 10989
> > > > 845-267-4000 x218
> > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:29:08 GMT-3