From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Tue Apr 27 2004 - 11:27:21 GMT-3
But if your lab says anything about following the diagram, then that would
be correct.
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, CISSP,
JNCIS, et al.
IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
http://www.ipexpert.net
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
ccie2be
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 6:50 AM
To: Richard Dumoulin; Kenneth Wygand; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Failed again - recommendation to regrade?
Hey Richard,
Unless you're told the sub has to be specified that particular way in the
lab instructions, it doesn't matter if you use int s0.1 or int s0.<dlci>
At least that's my understanding. And, I'm 99% confident that is correct.
If someone knows differently, I'd like to hear what they have to say.
Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Dumoulin" <richard.dumoulin@vanco.es>
To: "Kenneth Wygand" <KWygand@customonline.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 3:42 AM
Subject: RE: Failed again - recommendation to regrade?
> Hi Kenneth, sorry to hear that. But have you tried a mock lab ? The
> feedback is well worth to detect errors you may not notice on your own.
> I took one last week and one of my errors was that whenever I would
> configure a frame-relay subinterface I would type "interface serial 0/0.1
> point-to-point" instead of "interface serial0/0.301 point-to-point" which
> was on the diagram !?!?!? It is a stupid mistake I would never had
> noticed on my own.
>
> Regards
>
> --Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kenneth Wygand [mailto:KWygand@customonline.com]
> Sent: martes, 27 de abril de 2004 3:13
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Failed again - recommendation to regrade?
>
>
> Well according to Cisco, I just failed my second attempt at RTP. Funny
> thing is I think I failed by approximately 9 points, yet some of the
> sections they took points from were working perfectly! Satisfied all the
> requirements and 99% sure I determined and avoided all the pitfalls.
>
>
>
> I'm going to go for the regrade and hope to make the 0.000000003% (or at
> least that's how it seems). I just hope the proctor regrading the exam
> doesn't care more about keeping the "overturned regrades ratio" down than
> doing an honest regrade.
>
>
>
> Honestly, I think the proctor that answers your questions should be the
> proctor that grades (or at least regrades) your exam. I'm not confident
the
> answers to the questions I received from my proctor are consistent across
> all proctors grading these exams.
>
>
>
> ::sigh:: I'll keep you all updated.
>
>
>
> Kenneth E. Wygand
> Systems Engineer, Project Services
>
> CISSP #37102, CCNP, CCDP, ACSP, Cisco IPT Design Specialist, MCP, CNA,
> Network+, A+
> Custom Computer Specialists, Inc.
>
> "I am not really smart. I just stick with problems longer." -Albert
Einstein
>
>
>
> Custom Computer Specialists, Inc.
>
> "Celebrating 25 Years of Excellence"
>
> [GroupStudy removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> image001.gif]
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
> http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
> http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon May 03 2004 - 19:48:56 GMT-3