From: EA Louie (elouie@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Dec 24 2001 - 06:43:03 GMT-3
In regards to Mike's original post, I'd be wary introducing anything that
wasn't mandated by the exam. Making up extra loopback addresses for router
ID's might give me some other solution that was not intended to be
available, for example. I'm all for giving myself every advantage where
it's viable (for example, specifying a known mac address in the ipx routing
command). Having said that, I would want to give my routers predictable
router id's, knowing that I couldn't introduce them into the routing table.
I guess that's the key for me, because the addition of that one connected
route could mean that my RT is incorrect. And Lord have mercy if I decided
I had to propagate those routes - I have enough trouble managing the few
routes that are already in the practice labs that I'm doing.
David's post is a little different - my supposition is that there *might* be
inherent or explicit restrictions in the lab exam that would steer me toward
one solution. I've already seen my share of cloudy customer requirements,
so any vague requirements in the lab exam would fit right in with my
experience. Ambiguity, in my experience and opinion, is part of the exam
just as it is in real life. When I take the lab exam, I've decided to ask
the proctor yes or no questions as often as practical/possible, so that I'll
get a better chance of getting a clear answer. Asking those kinds of
questions will require that I know the different solutions possible, and the
possible scenarios. It's just an experiment (as anything else that I've
done that is unproven). Exams are (according to most of my former
professors) learning experiences as well as opportunities to demonstrate our
knowledge, so I'm eagerly and nervously anticipating my exam (my first
retake almost 5 years).
Everyone has their complaints about the exam (it's unfair, I didn't know
what they were asking for, the grading sucks, the proctor didn't answer my
questions, the proctor was late, that subject wasn't on the blueprint, my
routers kept crashing, my lab neighbor ate my lunch, etc etc etc) and their
reasons for achieving the certification, ranging from just plain personal
desire to employment improvement and financial reward, to employers
requiring it for continued improvement, and there are certainly many paths
to get to the prize. And all of those reasons are valid except for the one
"It will make me king of the networking world". Mine is purely personal -
new CCIE's aren't earning what I already earn. For me, it's kind of like
climbing Mt. Everest without the danger, frostbite and physical exertion.
My guess to the vacant lab seats is that people forfeit the $1250 for
whatever reason (had to work, couldn't get a flight, my dog ate my routers),
which is a shame and is also their choice.
I wish this were as simple as learning Cisco IOS <sigh>. If that were the
case, I could just try to memorize the documentation...right now, I'm stuck
on the problem of why bgp routes won't propagate to an external neighbor.
Frustrating? Yes. Rewarding? Sometimes. Keeping me off the streets and
out of trouble? Mostly. ;-)
----- Original Message -----
From: <Giveortake@aol.com>
To: <m.popovich@home.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: IP Addressing in the Lab environment.
> I have further questions on addressing. While not wanting to violate
any
> NDA agreements which is always my goal, I feel that sometimes directions
are
> not clearly stated. Having taken the exam once I am unsure of what
exactly
> they wanted in some instances.
>
> Same holds true for the practice labs I have taken. Once I look at the
> solutions to the practice labs I undertand exactly what they wanted, but
> while trying to do them without looking at solutions I often times end up
> providing configurations that seem to provide the requested solution yet
end
> up not matching.
>
> There is multiple ways to configure many things. I just wonder what kind
of
> grading scale is in effect. That no doubt depends on the individual
proctor
> that grades. This again goes back to my previous comments about learning
> how to take a test vs. knowing enough to be a CCIE............
>
> Is this a fair test? Can it be done without having NDA type information
> availble or without taking it multiple times? Is it cheating to try to
> gather NDA information in an effort to try to pass at less than the 2.7
times
> average since the costs to test are so significant and after all once you
> take it 2 times you have a really good idea...... This on top of
scheduling
> which in my opionin intentionally limits the # of CCIE's. Which as a side
> note I am glad for since I will soon be one of them...
>
> Is it unreasonable to try to save $3,000 per attempt to get a better
> understanding of what is required by consulting with those that have taken
> it???
>
> Irrespective, the bar is still high as the barrier to entry still requires
> more than the typical Microsoft exam which only requires a PC and some
> bootlegged software. This exam even with the best "cheating" requires
> thousands of hours of work with expensive equipment.
>
> I state these things only out of frustration: Frustration at so many
> things. My inability to pass after tons of work and the thought that some
> one would consider my efforts "cheating" and out of what some one labled
as
> immaturity.
>
> CCIE's are not the holy grail. They are not necessaily the smartest
computer
> guys in the industry, they are simply the most dedicated to learning a
> specific aspect of the networking world. This particular specialty
happens
> to pay significantly better than the average network admin person... Thus
I
> guess CCIE's are the smartest since they are willing to devote so much of
> their time to that wich will give them the highest ROI for their effort.
>
> This is why I spend my time learing Cisco IOS. When and if another more
> lucrative well adopted technology evolves, I will leave my IOS skills in a
> heartbeat.
>
> For now I continue to figure out how to become the best IOS engineer and
> continue to promote the most widely adopted platform in the
> business..................
>
> Do we really think that CCIE's are smarter techincally than so many server
> techs or is it just that the barrier to entry via number of hours of
> experience working on expensive equipment is the true barrier???
>
> All and all I could care less as I being smart enough to follow the cash
have
> decided to take work opportunities that spend my time working on the items
> that have the best financial return for me. This is called capitalism.
>
> As a secondary note, when I took my exam, I showed up at 7:30 AM all hyped
up
> for my 8 am test time. The proctor didnt show up until 8:20 and basically
> said it didnt matter since he would give us the specified amount of time
> anyway.
>
> Whle I didnt feel slighted, it didnt go a long way to helping my thoughts
of
> total professionalsim among the testing process. That and the fact that
the
> lab was equiped with at least 10 workstations and there were only two
people
> attempting the exam. Myself and one other. Why were there so many seats
> open and yet none showed up on the online scheduling???
>
> Maybe it had to do with 9/11 cancellations, or maybe more so that Cisco is
> for whatever reason working to slow down the number of CCIE's it
graduates?
> Perplexing questions that I dont expect anyone other than Chanbers to
> explain...
>
> One Mans Impressions.
>
> David
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:47 GMT-3