From: Jason Graun (jgraun@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Nov 09 2001 - 12:37:04 GMT-3
Ok I think this posting has made its point. 1) Use common sense when
ask questions or answering question about the lab. If you don't have
common sense you probably wont be a CCIE. 2) Cisco ahs worked harder to
maintain the CCIE quality over the years so that it doesn't turn
into another "MCSE NT 4.0" situation. 3) Anybody that has taken the lab
(pass or fail) has worked hard to understand the technologies and
concepts, lets respect them and ourselves for all the work we have done.
Thanx
Jason
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Larson, Chris (Contractor)
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 8:44 AM
To: 'Leigh Anne Chisholm'; Larson, Chris (Contractor); 'Thomas Larus';
ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: one day format
My last post about the NDA in hopes you will get my original point which
is
quite simply this.
. (I know this is a waste of group time but...)
This is very simple.
What we all call the NDA is not the NDA according to Cisco. It is the
confidentiality agreement. The NDA according to Cisco only applies to
certified ppl. The confidentiality agreement applies to anyone taking
the
test. This is easy to see because they are both post on the site.
Click this link
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/625/ccie/ccie_program/policies.html
Scroll down to number 9.
Click "Non-disclosure agreement" (NDA). Read Terms and Termination,
they
basically say the following.
Terms and Termination
"This agreement shall commence once Cisco notifies the individual that
he or
she has met the requirements for a certain certification including
assent to
the terms in this agreement."
So, therefore, for the NDA to be valid you must have 1) passed 2) been
notified that by Cisco that you passed 3) signed the NDA
The Confidentiality agreement also list under #9 applies to EVERYONE who
takes the exam.
My whole point all along however petty and stupid is simply this. When
we
say NDA we are not talking about the NDA, what we are really talking
about
is the confidentiality agreement because the NDA only applies to people
who
have passed.
It is a matter of terms and symantics. If we use Cisco terms then all
this
talk about the NDA is wrong because the NDA according to cisco applies
to
certified people. So when we all say NDA what we really mean is Cisco's
confidentiality agreement.
-----Original Message-----
From: Leigh Anne Chisholm [mailto:lachisho@tnc.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 7:20 PM
To: Leigh Anne Chisholm; Larson, Chris (Contractor); 'Thomas Larus';
ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: one day format
PS. Even though the reference later in the document changes references
from
"Certified Individual" to just "individual", you still can't construe
this
to mean "certified individuals" as referring to individuals that are
certified whereas "individuals" referrs to individuals not certified.
Without having seen that actual agreement, I'd have to conclude from
what
you've said, that it is just an example of sloppy terminology on the
part of
the lawyer that drew up the contract.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> Leigh Anne Chisholm
> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 5:05 PM
> To: Larson, Chris (Contractor); 'Thomas Larus'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: one day format
>
>
> Sorry Chris, but you're misinterpreting "legal-ese".
> "Hereinafter referred
> to as" means that the term that follows this statement is used in lieu
of
> the name you put on the contract. Instead of saying "Chris
> Larson agrees to
> the following conditions", the document states: "Certified
> Individual agrees
> to the following conditions" - which means that the undersigned (in
your
> case, Chris Larson) agrees to the following conditions. It's a
> common legal
> substitution you'll find in any generic contract. "Lessee", "Lessor",
> "Guarantor", are common forms of substitutions used in place of the
common
> names of the contracting parties.
>
> For a good example of the substitution process in action, check out
this
> link:
>
> http://www.socialworkconsult.com/contract.html
>
>
> -- Leigh Anne
>
> PS. No wonder the lawyers in the firm I worked for liked me. I
> spoke their
> language. And that **SCARES** me...
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf
Of
> > Larson, Chris (Contractor)
> > Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 2:29 PM
> > To: 'Thomas Larus'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: one day format
> >
> >
> > Actually, at the top it says undersigned hereinafter referred to as
> > Certified Individual. But in the terms and termination you would
> > notice that
> > it says the agreement commences once Cisco has notified that
> > individual of
> > passing the requirements for certification.
> >
> > That is why I say it only applies to certified individuals.
> Because if you
> > read the whole thing (even though the top says undersigned
hereinafter
> > refered to as certified individual) the terms and termination
> > section of the
> > agreement, the contract only commences once Cisco has notified
> > you that you
> > have passed.
> >
> > Therefore the NDA (not the confidentiality agreement) only applies
to
> > certified individuals.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Larus [mailto:tlarus@mwc.edu]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 4:09 PM
> > To: Larson, Chris (Contractor); 'david'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: one day format
> >
> >
> > Do not take this as legal advice, but it would be a big mistake
> > to interpret
> > the words "Certified Individual" in the NDA agreement as
> applying only to
> > those people who have actually passed and become certified. In
> > the context
> > of the NDA, the term "Certified Individual" is set equal to "the
> > undersigned" -- the person signing the agreement before taking an
exam.
> > Look at the very first paragraph of the NDA. If the agreement
> referred to
> > "the undersigned" as "Cheese Sandwich," all references to
> > "Cheese Sandwich"
> > would apply to the test taker.
> >
> > You and I, and everyone else on this list are "Certified
> > Individuals" bound
> > by this agreement.
> >
> > I'm a lawyer who never liked the gladiatorial aspects side of
> > law, so I fled
> > to networking. Now if I could only find a job that involves
> > legal research
> > and writing as well as Cisco networking, I would be a happy man
> indeed. I
> > have a dream that someday some headhunter will call me with a
> job posting
> > requiring a CCIE or CCIE-candidate with experience as a lawyer.
> > The closest
> > thing I've heard of is a contract negotiator for Cisco (in
> Belgium or the
> > Netherlands, I think it was), but that would not involve enough
hands-on
> > technical work, and I am not good at driving a hard bargain.
> >
> >
> > Thomas Larus, CCNP, CCNA, MCSE, JD
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Larson, Chris (Contractor)" <Chris.Larson@ed.gov>
> > To: "'david'" <barbedwireblack@yahoo.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 2:02 PM
> > Subject: RE: one day format
> >
> >
> > > Most people don't really care and won't appreciate you
> > revealing what you
> > > had in the exam because they feel it lessens the value and
> hard work of
> > > others. I agree that there is potential to do that but.......
> > >
> > > I don't want to get anything started here, or get flamed all
> the way to
> > > hell, however..........
> > >
> > > If you reveal that in your lab question number X asked you to
> > do such and
> > > such you are violating the confidentiality agreement. The NDA
actually
> > > applies only to individuals that are already certitified.
> > >
> > > Check it out. Paragraph 8 Section c
> > >
> >
>
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/625/ccie/ccie_program/cert_agreement.pd
f
> > >
> > >
> > > Furthermore the confidentiality agreement states that you will not
> > disclose
> > > questions or answers in the exam or the content of exam
> materials. ie.
> > > Question number x stated this. Or this was my topology, things of
that
> > > nature.
> > >
> > > Saying you had to do OSPF with authentication does not break the
> > > confidentiality agreement (as far as my understanding in dealing
w/
> > Cisco).
> > > That does not disclose a question, an answer or the content of
exam
> > > materials. Everyone knows you could get OSPF and therefore
> you need to
> > know
> > > all the knobs for OSPF.
> > >
> > > If you said in the exam in section 3 I had to do ospf w/
> > authentication in
> > > area 0 which was router x, y, and Z then you have a problem.
> > >
> > > I have discussed this with Cisco before when assisting with a lab
prep
> > > course and this is basically what they had said. They also stated
that
> > > anything that is already public knowledge is not breaking the
> > > confidentiality agreement. Therefore since the blueprint for the
exam
> > talks
> > > about OSPF, saying you had OSPF is not a violation. Again
> saying you had
> > > ospf between routers x and z and giving away topology info is!!
> > >
> > > That is my understanding. We almost all know what we will get
> > in the exam
> > > (just watching this list is the best indication). It is the
> > combination of
> > > items, knobs, technologies and topologies and how they are mixed
that
> > makes
> > > the exam hard.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: david [mailto:barbedwireblack@yahoo.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 12:44 PM
> > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: Re: one day format
> > >
> > >
> > > so if i tell somebody that during my lab
> > > i had to configure ospf authentication
> > > that would be a NDA violation?
> > > Cisco says that anything in the 12.1 IOS is
> > > fair game except for the topics that have been
> > > excluded.
> > > So why can't you tell someone that your lab
> > > included a topic that is in on the DOC CD.
> > >
> > > Configuring OSPF authentication can be pretty
> > > complicated seen a lot of posts on it.
> > > telling someone would not alleviate the
> > > time and effort needed to correctly implement
> > > this feature in a test environment or live production.
> > >
> > > I beleive the NDA is supposed to be a way to keep
> > > people from memorizing the exact test without
> > > knowing or understanding the technologies.
> > > To stop things like the MCSE transcender phenomenon.
> > > Thus guaranteeing some degree of competency
> > > in the individuals who attain certification.
> > >
> > > I beleive it would be impossible to memorize
> > > scenarios for the CCIE lab without a good
> > > understanding of the features, caveats, and
> > > interworkings of the Cisco IOS.
> > >
> > > which i beleive the certification is trying
> > > to discern if you have this knowledge or not.
> > >
> > > I could be wrong happens lots of times.
> > >
> > > thanks for the feedback,
> > > David
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- "@ Home NetMail" <tveillette@home.com> wrote:
> > > > Absolutely an NDA issue, anything specific, and
> > > > configuring a router as a
> > > > tftp is very specific. As long as you are going
> > > > after the 15th anything in
> > > > 12.1 can be tested.
> > > >
> > > > As for the IP addressing, it will be crystal clear
> > > > once the proctor brief's
> > > > you and
> > > > you get started. IP addressing will be a non-issue
> > > > at this level, at least
> > > > so far, as
> > > > they stated in the CCIE webcast a while back, there
> > > > aren't any installed
> > > > issues...
> > > > YET.
> > > >
> > > > -Todd
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: david david <barbedwireblack@yahoo.com>
> > > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 10:31 AM
> > > > Subject: one day format
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > who has taken the new 1 day format?
> > > > >
> > > > > i'm not quite sure what to expect.
> > > > > they say the ip addressing is already done for
> > > > you.
> > > > > does that mean the routers are proconfiged or are
> > > > > they just on the diagram. not sure.
> > > > > trying to find out.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some people have elluded to obscure topics but
> > > > > no one will say what kind of topics.
> > > > > It shouldn't be NDA to say that ( being able
> > > > > to configure a router as a tftp server was a topic
> > > > )
> > > > > Should it?
> > > > > Do anybody you have any idea what these
> > > > > obscure topics are.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks in advance,
> > > > > David
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 21 2002 - 06:45:11 GMT-3