From: Robert Dubell (bobdu11@xxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Nov 08 2001 - 19:39:56 GMT-3
They grade you on the specifics for each section. If you complete section
1, skip section 2, but complete section 3, even though mabe you needed some
routing configs in sec 2 to complete sec 3 they don't ding you if you do all
the configurations correctly for the specific section.,.....
-----Original Message-----
From: Don Dettmore <don@donshouse.com>
To: Richard Foltz <ccie2b@rfoltz.com>; ccielab@groupstudy.com
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Date: Thursday, November 08, 2001 5:17 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