From: Brian Lodwick (xpranax@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Mar 09 2002 - 22:19:15 GMT-3
When dealing with secret information in the military I was told the enemy
might already have all this information, but they don't know for sure if it
is accurate until you validate it for them.
If we somehow dillude the difficulty of this certification by giving others
the easy track. It will most surely dillude the value of this certification
as well, and I commend Cisco for enforcing the NDA for me because I am going
to get this darn certification.
I think the idea is to keep this cert from becoming another ______ for
dummies showing the exact questions you'll be asked when you arrive on lab
day.
>>>Brian
Couldn't help but to throw my 2 cents in. Sorry for wasting the space on
your server Paul, with a non-technical message.
From: Jay Hennigan <jay@west.net>
>Reply-To: Jay Hennigan <jay@west.net>
>To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@ldd.net>
>CC: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: RE: no flames -- please (about NDA) Don't Sweat it.
>Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 10:22:10 -0800 (PST)
>
>On Sat, 9 Mar 2002, Michael Snyder wrote:
>
> > Here's the deal. This study group and the CCIE program fish from the
> > same pond. You are saying that you are surprised to see questions about
> > scenarios that you know are on the lab exam. Think about it, how could
> > it be otherwise? We all have about the same skill sets, and we are
> > studying the same things and using the same equipment. If we are
> > studying things that aren't on the exam, are we not wasting our time?
>
>Here's the deal. The amount of data in the Doc CD is huge, and Enterprise
>IOS has many thousands of nuances of configuration commands. The lab exam
>is evolving and typically consists of the core routing protocols along with
>"twists" as well as a few off-the-wall configuration commands. The
>"twists"
>and off-the-wall commands change and evolve. It's a _very_ big pond, with
>_many_ species of fish.
>
>So you've been on the list, and reading the recommended books, and doing
>the Fatkid and commercial lab scenarios. (Odds are that the CCIE group at
>Cisco does this as well, so they know the twists and off-the-wall stuff
>that's well-documented in the practice material.) You take the CCIE lab
>and encounter a twist or off-the-wall that isn't quite like anything you
>have encountered in the material you've been pounding into your brain.
>Maybe you are able to figure it out, maybe not. Maybe you pass, maybe you
>don't.
>
>A few days or a week later, you read Groupstudy, and the *exact* same
>unusual twist or off-the-wall command appears. Right down to the same
>time interval, or the same router numbers, "You are allowed to do 'X'
>on R3 but not 'Y' on R5" for example. Something that has not appeared
>here before and you haven't seen in any of the books, and something that
>caused you enough grief in the lab that you remember it very well.
>
>And, unlike the typical "How do I keep ISDN from flapping" that gets lots
>of answers and comes up periodically here, the response to this *exact*
>question that you just saw in the lab but have never seen before here is
>complete silence, at least for a while. Silence because most of the
>group hasn't seen that question asked before and worked out an answer,
>and those who have seen it know just where they've seen it and know that
>it would be very improper to respond.
>
>That's the deal. It's dishonest, unethical, and cheating. And it doesn't
>work. Because by the time you get the answer and it becomes common
>knowledge it will be replaced by a different "gotcha" in the real thing.
>
>I agree that the best response to seeing such a question asked here is
>to not comment publicly on the NDA aspects. And, for the record, Chuck
>did not comment publicly. A note to CCIE @ cisco with a copy of the
>question could be appropriate, or a private warning. I'd prefer a note
>to Cisco. They have the resources to see if the person asking just
>happened to recently take the lab exam, and which lab, and whether that
>question was on it, and take appropriate action. Mentioning NDA publicly
>just calls attention to the question being on an actual lab scenario.
>
>This list server is a valuable resource to those who are pursuing this
>certification honestly, and many of us who have achieved it also owe thanks
>to it and continue to participate out of gratitude. Paul provides it at
>what is doubtless considerable expense of his own time and money as a
>public
>service. He can't afford to deal with a flock of angry Cisco lawyers.
>If postings here result in such a flock of lawyers, this resource will
>cease to exist. Do you want that? I didn't think so.
>
>That's the deal.
>
>--
>Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - jay@west.net
>NetLojix Communications, Inc. - http://www.netlojix.com/
>WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:56:58 GMT-3