From: Richard Foltz (ccie2b@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Nov 08 2001 - 19:31:20 GMT-3
i would have to say that is definately not true.
Richard Foltz, CCIE#8339, CCNP-Voice, CCDP, MCSE+I, Network+, A+
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Dettmore" <don@donshouse.com>
To: "Richard Foltz" <ccie2b@rfoltz.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: how does lab grading work?
> You see, I thought the opposite from what I read on this forum - that even
> before they go through the configurations, they run an automated ping
> script - and if your pings don't work, you automatically fail the section
> (without anyone ever looking at it). Is that not true?
>
> Don Dettmore
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Foltz" <ccie2b@rfoltz.com>
> To: "Don Dettmore" <don@donshouse.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 4:11 PM
> Subject: Re: how does lab grading work?
>
>
> > no, the proctor in RTP specifically said they do not double ding you for
> > points.
> > Richard Foltz, CCIE#8339, CCNP-Voice, CCDP, MCSE+I, Network+, A+
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Don Dettmore" <don@donshouse.com>
> > To: "CCIE Lab List" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 4:55 PM
> > Subject: how does lab grading work?
> >
> >
> > > I have a question on how the lab grading works. I took it recently -
> > failed
> > > :0( - but was unable to receive a debriefing (long story) I was
> therefore
> > > unable to ask questions on what I missed.
> > >
> > > I noticed during the lab that getting a section working was often
> > dependent on
> > > getting an earlier section working. Well, what if you do the
> > configurations
> > > for a section correctly, but your pings don't work due to a deficiency
> of
> > an
> > > earlier section. Do you lose credit for both sections????
> > >
> > > Let me give you an hypothetical example (this is nothing like what was
> on
> > my
> > > exam, just an example):
> > >
> > > RouterA ---- RouterB ---- RouterC --- RouterD
> > >
> > > Section 1: Configure OSPF on routers A, B, and C so that RouterA can
> ping
> > > RouterC.
> > >
> > > Section 2: Configure ISIS on RouterC and RouterD. Redistribute such
> that
> > > RouterA can ping RouterD.
> > >
> > > For argument's sake, lets say you have trouble with section one and
just
> > can't
> > > get RouterA to ping RouterC. BUT, you are comfortable with Section 2,
> and
> > > configure everything correctly. HOWEVER, because of your failure on
> > section
> > > 1, RouterA still cannot ping RouterD (thus failing to satisfy section
> 2's
> > > criteria, despite the fact that you configured it correctly). Do you
> lose
> > the
> > > points for section 2 as well (even though you configured it
correctly)?
> > >
> > > Sadly, I had several analogous situations on my lab, and I think they
> > might be
> > > the reason I failed.
> > >
> > > My questions is this: should I have 'kluged' a section I knew I was
> going
> > to
> > > miss anyway, just to get another section working? Say, in the example
> > above,
> > > If you knew you were going to miss section one anyway, would it be
worth
> > it to
> > > put in static routes (even if expressly forbidden) to accomplish
section
> 1
> > > just to get section 2 pings to work?
> > >
> > > I'm retaking my lab soon, and I'd like to know if I need to resort to
> > stuff
> > > like that.
> > >
> > > TIA
> > >
> > > Don Dettmore
> > >
> > > PS: props to anyone who actually made it to the end of this email -
you
> > are
> > > truly dedicated (way more than me ;-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 21 2002 - 06:45:09 GMT-3