From: talbotpat (talbotpat@cox.net)
Date: Tue Dec 24 2002 - 13:36:05 GMT-3
The answer to such a question would not in itself constitute a violation of
the NDA. Unless, of course, the answer given was inappropriate or revealed
actual exam content/questions instead of a topical outline. As for what you
'interpret' the question to mean, as it pertains to someone's 'intent', I
would proceed with great caution here. Unless one is a mind reader, and we
will assume for the purposes of this conversation that you are not; I am
*certainly* not ;-), it would be impossible to measure the intent of Raj's
post. At face value, the question is benign, has been asked and answered
several times here and elsewhere, and an improper response to the question
has not been generated on this list. Granted, Raj could have gone to the
Cisco website or any number of places to obtain the answer to his question,
and I would encourage him to do so, but the fact that he asked a question
here that can be answered on CCO cannot be construed as an attempt to
subvert the NDA or the integrity of the exam. I don't normally post long
messages about non study topics, and apologize for grabbing anyone's
attention who sees this as a waste of bandwidth, but it is the Christmas
season and I had to chime in with a 'Peace on Earth, Goodwill toward men'
post about not questioning the integrity of others without ample evidence.
Happy Christmas to All, and Success in your Studies and Labs!
Pat
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe" <groupstudy@comcast.net>
To: "'Chris Home'" <clarson52@comcast.net>; "'Rajashekar'"
<rraja@cisco.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 8:01 PM
Subject: RE: Reg New CCIE lab
> Yes, but since we ALL have access to the changes listed on the Cisco web
> site, why ask THAT question here. That's why I interpret the question
> as trying to solicit a more detailed description based on collective
> experience of the members of this list, and that would indeed be a
> violation.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Chris Home
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 10:06 PM
> To: Joe; 'Rajashekar'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Reg New CCIE lab
>
>
> Not really.
>
> Some of the changes are that Token-ring is gone, the CAT5000 was
> replaced with 2 Cat 3550's, I think they took out IPX as well. There are
> others. If you look through the CCIE lab info on CCO you should find
> some info on the changes
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe" <groupstudy@comcast.net>
> To: "'Rajashekar'" <rraja@cisco.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 8:20 PM
> Subject: RE: Reg New CCIE lab
>
>
> > I think the answer to this one would violate the NDA, don't you
> > think??????????????????????????
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > Of Rajashekar
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 3:41 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Reg New CCIE lab
> >
> >
> > Since the New Lab exam from November 4th, I would like to know the
> > changes that have happened to the CCIE LAB exam as compared to earlier
>
> > one.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Raj
> > .
> .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:53 GMT-3