From: Johnny Peterson (johnny@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed May 01 2002 - 00:05:54 GMT-3
To get this thread back on topic. I have a question.
When connecting 2 routers via their respective AUX ports to practice DDR,
what cable is used? Is it a rollover cable?
Best Regards,
Johnny Peterson
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Sanjay Prajapati
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 9:49 PM
To: 'Zhang, Stan'; 'Church, Chuck '
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: CCIE #9240 - Pretty OT at this point.
AYE!!
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Zhang, Stan
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 7:16 PM
To: 'Church, Chuck '
Cc: ''ccielab@groupstudy.com' '
Subject: RE: CCIE #9240 - Pretty OT at this point.
Chuck is our man!! Let kill the thread. All those agree please reply to
this thread and say "AYE".
SZ
-----Original Message-----
From: Church, Chuck
Cc: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
Sent: 4/30/02 9:55 PM
Subject: CCIE #9240 - Pretty OT at this point.
Can't we all just get along?
We've gone through this thread before. The CCIE lab has
definitely
changed over the last 5 years, but I don't think anyone can make a call
as
to when it was most difficult. In the old days, it was more of a
research
project. There was no information on it. Just lots of rumors. As info
and
study guides/practice labs came out, Cisco made it tougher by cramming
more
in, making time a bigger issue. Does that make one harder than the
other?
The passing rate is still in the 10-15% range, so I think it's still
adequately difficult. But then again, who cares? With the dollars and
responsibility involved in hiring a network engineer, you can bet a
company
will look hard at one's resume, and ask several hours of tough
questions.
Those who don't have what it takes either won't be hired, or will be the
first to be let go. Just don't ever stop learning, that's what I say.
Chuck Church
CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
Sr. Network Engineer
US Tennis Association
70 W. Red Oak Lane
White Plains, NY 10604
914-696-7199
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Mingzhou Nie
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 7:58 PM
To: dmadlan@qwest.com
Cc: Sean Wu; 'Peter Rosenthal'; thomas larus; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: CCIE #9240
You are wrong, Dave. When I say "won't ever thing earlier CCIEs are
better technically", I have no intention to disdain old takers, I
simply counter Sean's point that older CCIEs are more admirable in
terms of indepent studying.
Is a CCIE 9200 superior to CCIE20000? No way. Just because there's more
ways to discuss and practice doesn't challenge a CCIE's accountibilty.
I'm certainly ignorant at some point because I'm not a perfect man.
However, being an OLDER CCIE, you simply take my words personal and
distorted my original thought. You are ignorant in my opinion, thought
you are a CCIE.
Don't take it personal, Dave. You are welcome to debate with me. Let's
take if offline if you will.
--- MADMAN <dmadlan@qwest.com> wrote:
>
> I thought better for a moment than to even respond to your email
> but I
> think you may be missing a clue.
>
> I'm one of the 1996 test takers. Yes you are correct, there was no
> voice, QOS, switches nor several of the knobs available now. In 5
> years
> from now there will be new technologies that people will be learning,
> does this mean people who are currently passing will be the
> equivalent
> to your view of the "1996/97" CCIE's?
>
> What else has changed Mingzhou? There was no Cisco press, CCNA,
> CCNP,
> CCXX..., no bootcamps, no world wide mail lists brimming with NDA
> info,
> no virtual labs etc. You learned by working on networks and studing
> based on the little info available concerning the lab and when you
> felt
> up to it you went to San Jose.
>
> So do you suppose those who took the test then fell off the face of
> the earth or what?? Who do think helped test, implement,
> troubleshoot,
> teach etc. the new technologies that are currently being tested???
>
> BTW, I don't think most of the "old" CCIE's give a damn what you
> think
> of us technically anyway but thanks for sharing your ignorance.
>
> Dave
>
>
> Mingzhou Nie wrote:
> >
> > I don't agree, Sean. Do you know what had been tested in 1996/7.
> > There's no voice, not Qos, no new techs that has since been added.
> I
> > won't ever thing earlier CCIEs are better technically.
> >
> > --- Sean Wu <vpivci@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Peter, I agree with you in that experience is important to this
> > > field,
> > > and most network managers tend to think in the same way. But what
> > > about
> > > the quality of experience, in my mind, 2 years' experience with
> > > intensive cisco hands-on is much more valuable than 5 years'
> first
> > > level
> > > network support.
> > >
>
> David Madland
> Sr. Network Engineer
> CCIE# 2016
> Qwest Communications Int. Inc.
> dave@interprise.com
> 612-664-3367
>
> "Emotion should reflect reason not guide it"
=====
- | |
:|||: :|||:
:|||||||: :|||||||:
.:|||||||||||:.:|||||||||||:.
C i s c o S y s t e m s
www.cisco.com/tac
Empowering the Internet Generation
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:25 GMT-3