From: Brian (signal@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Nov 02 2001 - 12:29:36 GMT-3
Well, If you had a particular dial backup scenerio on the lab, and you
couldn't figure it out, and so you extracted just that one part, and
researched and asked questions here how to get something like that to
work, I am not sure that would be a violation of NDA.
If you used the exact router numbers (for example if on the actual lab it
was between R3 and R5), and you used the exact IP addressing, then that
would definitly be wrong. but I mean, you have to figure this out
somehow. I think the key is:
1. extracting the problem down to the smallest concept you can, and remove
all other parts.
2. change any ip addressing, router id's, etc.
3. try to re-word the problem if possible as best as possible.
4. do not make any remark about the problem being from a CCIE lab
I think the above would keep you safe. So long as you aren't posting
entire scenrios. But I mean if someone posts "I have this R2 trying to do
dial backup to R5, but its not working, what below am I doing wrong", and
then they show a snippet of router code, I don't think Cisco would call
that an NDA. If you use there ip addressing, router id's, and mention
that it came from the lab, that would be wrong.
Also doing something like "Well, I failed my lab yesterday, but I haven't
given up yet. Does anyone know how to get something like the below to
work". That would be pretty stupid, because its just like telling
everyone that what you are posting was on your lab. And really this is
for the betterment of everyone. You don't want to clue people in, you
want to hold high standards. The fact is, just because someone had
something on the lab doesn't mean everyone else is going to have it. You
really do need to know everything.
Brian Feeny
CCIE #8036
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, EA Louie wrote:
> on the subject of identical questions, it leads one to ask how many
> permutations of topology and routing protocol can there possibly be before
> someone does run into something that's identical to what's on the lab.
>
> It just reminds me of the old parable about placing 100 monkeys behind a
> keyboard, and, given infinite time, their random typing would eventually
> type "To be or not to be".
>
> The only difference here is that the relatively few number of permutations
> is much lower for CCIE-level topologies
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Brown" <Jim.Brown@CaseLogic.com>
> To: <EdmondsSG@aol.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 6:13 PM
> Subject: RE: NDA
>
>
> > The worst thing we could do is reply to a question that has been asked
> with
> > a statement saying "This violates the NDA."
> >
> > I've seen it happen before.
> >
> > I can say I've noticed questions on study material and practice labs which
> > were IDENTICAL to the actual exam.
> >
> > The person asking the question could be asking it in response to some of
> the
> > materials I just mentioned.
> >
> > The worst thing we could do is highlight these questions by complaining
> > about them in public.
> >
> > As someone who has failed, I feel your pain.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: EdmondsSG@aol.com [mailto:EdmondsSG@aol.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 3:54 PM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: NDA
> >
> >
> > As someone whose taken (and failed) the lab I can't believe how many
> people
> > ask questions here that were lifted straight from my exam!!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 21 2002 - 06:45:02 GMT-3