From: steven.j.nelson@xxxxxx
Date: Mon Jun 17 2002 - 10:48:36 GMT-3
Sorry Troy,
Have to disagree, I had some requirement in my lab pertaining to ISDN. I
tested it fully 3 times, the last time being 10mins before the end of the
test as I know a number of people who have had bad marks for dial.
My solution worked perfectly, I gained less than 50% of the marks.
So they are looking for some specifics in addition to the solution working.
HTH
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: Troy Rader [mailto:troy@onenet.net]
Sent: 17 June 2002 14:29
To: Erhan Kurt; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Interpretaion of questions
If you accomplish what they ask, and do not use techniques they say you
cannot use, you get the points. My understanding has always been that the
proctors do not get to pick and choose what they personally like for a
solution. If you get it working, and don't violate the requirements of the
question, you get the points.
I have had every question I asked, answered. I've been twice. I never ask
"which solution do you want". I clarify any wording that is unclear to me.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erhan Kurt" <kurt@superonline.net>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 6:54 AM
Subject: RE: Interpretaion of questions
> Folks,
>
> Instead of saying some percentages, it's better to talk about
interpretation
> issues in the exam.. It may be an effective way to interpret some topics
> here before real exam.
>
> Some topics are listed below:
>
> 1- Redistribution techniques:
> for example: which is the best way for area 0 range: 2nd OSPF
> process or redist. Conn. before summary address.
> 2- DDR:
> Interpreting is so important to do the way actually wanted.
> 3- QoS:
> i.e. in FRTS, your calculations of CIR, Bc, mincir will be based on
> verbal sentences provided.
> 4- BGP:
> Communities, attributes, confederations, sync vs no-sync...
> 5- ACL:
> o PAY ATTENTION to your ALL already done stuff when putting an
> access-list, if you have any, you must permit equivalent ports for them
like
> tcp eq bgp, ospf, eigrp, ntp, snmp, udp eq rip, etc.
> o PAY ATTENTION to new services through an interface containing
> access-list... if so make necessary changes on the access-list....
>
> 6- Bla, Bla, Bla.....
>
> It's sometimes really hard to say that this is the best way or the way
> wanted .. And then the result will be negative even it looks working...
>
>
> Never Give Up,
> Erhan
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Luu [mailto:wicked01@ix.netcom.com]
> Sent: 16 Haziran 2002 Pazar 23:27
> To: Anthony Pace; Wes Stevens; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Interpretaion of questions
>
>
> the ccie lab is 25% configuration and 75% interpretation
>
> At 08:06 PM 6/16/2002 +0000, Anthony Pace wrote:
> >I have the same problem interpreting the "lab questions". Many times
> >the best solution is not the correct one and it becomes important to
> >adhere to the "letter of the law" not the "spirit of the law" when
> >interpreting questions. This goes for the practice tests as well. One
> >thing I will do next time is "neatly write several options down" and
> >show them to the proctor. Others have said this is helpfull. I did not
> >avail myself of this when I took the test. Instead I chose to "stew in
> >my own juices' and waste alot of time speculating about all the
> >possible combinations of things which they "might" be looking for.
> >
> >Anthony PAce
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:14:11 +0000, "Wes Stevens"
> ><ccie_miami@hotmail.com> said:
> > > My first attempt was friday. I did not pass. Time was not that big
> > > of an issue. I was done with an hour left to check things.
> > > Everything seemed to
> > > work and I felt that I had at least followed the rules. But they must
> > > have
> > > not of liked my solutions. The interesting thing is that the parts
that
> > > seemed the easist were where I did the worst. The part that kicked my
> > > butt I
> > > did well in. I think part is that I got over confident on the easy
> > > parts and
> > > did not pay enough attention to them. But part is also the ability to
> > > interpret what they want for a solution. I don't feel experience is a
> > > big
> > > help here. I have been doing networking for many years and have never
> > > seen
> > > anything like what they put in front of me in the real world. I did
> > > give
> > > them a solution that worked and was technically sound - but that for
> > > sure
> > > was not enough. I have talked to several people that suggest a boot
> > > camp -
> > > many of them are designed to build up your skills in interpreting the
> > > lab.
> > > But I am on my own on this - no help from my company. I would really
> > > rather
> > > not have to pay for a bootcamp.
> > >
> > > So my question is what do you do - what do study and how do you
> > > study to build up these skills.
> > >
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 02 2002 - 08:12:34 GMT-3