From: Sean C. (Upp_and_Upp@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Mar 08 2002 - 23:39:18 GMT-3
I agree with John. And also, to quote John -
"You don't hear about them because they just disappear from the list with no
fanfare. It might take you a while to realize you haven't seen them posting
in quite a while!"
Very true. Notice how the particiation from people that sell commercial
labs has dropped in the last few weeks? True, their disappearance from the
newsgroup may not be because of NDA. I'm just using this as an example to
say that some users do 'disappear' from the newsgroup.
NOW, to ask a loaded question - without displaying the config - how does one
find out what the hold and hello timers are set to for IPX EIGRP? Please
note, I have not taken any CCIE lab yet - so I can't be breaking the NDA.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Neiberger" <neiby@ureach.com>
To: "Roberto Iannuzzi" <twinturbos@sympatico.ca>; "Ahmed Mamoor Amimi"
<mamoor@ieee.org>; "Leonardo Pereira" <lpereira@br.ibm.com>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: Re: IPX EIGRP hold-time
Chuck did *not* send that statement to everyone on the list.
He sent it directly to the original poster who then replied to
the list. Chuck was simply trying to warn someone that he
thought might be violating the NDA.
This isn't exactly bad advice, as Cisco does monitor this
list. That particular statement probably wouldn't get someone
into trouble, but who knows? There are people who have been
removed from the list and suspended from taking Cisco exams for
a year because they violated the NDA.
You don't hear about them because they just disappear from the
list with no fanfare. It might take you a while to realize you
haven't seen them posting in quite a while!
My $.02,
John
---- On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Roberto Iannuzzi
(twinturbos@sympatico.ca) wrote:
> Not according to Chuck Church, he is the one that gets the
person in
> trouble
> by posting "watch the NDA". Even though it may be an honest
question,
> Chuck
> brings unwanted attention to the original poser of the
question, hence
> the
> slew of extra e-mails.
>
> Had he not made this statement, the question would have gone
unnoticed,
> though read on as I believe this part is very important:
>
> **Chuck Church said: "Watch the NDA" to everyone in this
group which
> means
> he thinks it is an exam question and is telling everyone it
is**
>
> Is Chuck Church a Cisco employee representing Cisco on NDA
issues?
>
> Any comments would be appreciated....
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ahmed Mamoor Amimi" <mamoor@ieee.org>
> To: "Roberto Iannuzzi" <twinturbos@sympatico.ca>; "Leonardo
Pereira"
> <lpereira@br.ibm.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 4:41 PM
> Subject: Re: IPX EIGRP hold-time
>
>
> > I think this is a normal common question.... and there is
nothing in
> it to
> > break the NDA.
> >
> > If i say how to configure ip address.... then this will
also be
> breaking
> NDA
> > ... <g>
> >
> >
> > -Mamoor
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Roberto Iannuzzi <twinturbos@sympatico.ca>
> > To: Leonardo Pereira <lpereira@br.ibm.com>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 11:48 PM
> > Subject: Re: IPX EIGRP hold-time
> >
> >
> > > I agree. The only person breaking the NDA here is Chuck
Church...
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Leonardo Pereira" <lpereira@br.ibm.com>
> > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 1:26 PM
> > > Subject: Re: IPX EIGRP hold-time
> > >
> > >
> > > > Sorry, but why you said "watch the NDA" ?
> > > >
> > > > It is a question like any other. He can be found this
question in
> a
> book
> > > > scenario. But after your statement, I am quite sure
that in one
> exam
> > there
> > > > is a question like that. I really don't understand why
some people
> in
> > this
> > > > list don't answer some question because of NDA. I think
that NDA
> intend
> > to
> > > > prevent that someone arrive here and tell exact how is
the exam
> (the
> > > > questions and etc).
> > > >
> > > > But I don't see the question below as a NDA violation.
Am I wrong
> ???
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Leonardo.
> > > >
> > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:56:57 GMT-3