From: alsontra@hotmail.com
Date: Wed Jul 14 2004 - 22:16:07 GMT-3
Scott,
I am only asking because the grading of the CCIE lab is so "obscure". No one
"outside of Cisco" really knows how they are going to grade the exam. They
say the exam is result based, which I do not necessarily believe. If they
would just come out and say "we will not pass any R/S candidate who cannot
perform our IGP and EGP configs to a satisfactory level" I think I'd be more
comfortable. Anyone who has received a score report will most likely agree
with me when I say its -it's black magic... :-)
I'm not looking to make the tests any easier, but I would like to see the
grading put under little more scrutiny. Who knows perhaps it already is.
And regarding... "Just because I've done this before doesn't mean that
everything I say
must specifically mean something."
You are a Cisco Certified Internetworking Deity aren't you? ;-)
Alsontra (frustration)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com>
To: <alsontra@hotmail.com>; <Joe_Deleonardo@hotmail.com>; "'Fernando
Rodriguez'" <fernanrl@yahoo.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 3:45 PM
Subject: RE: Internetwork Experts CCIE Routing & Switching Lab Workbook
> Ok... Just because I've done this before doesn't mean that everything I
say
> must specifically mean something. :)
>
> It was to illustrate a point. IF the scenario was ONLY telling you THAT
> specific instruction. Then the delivery method wouldn't matter and if a
> script were written to grade on it, that would be the 'fair' way to figure
> out whether you succeeded or not.
>
> In the end, you do whatever the lab tells you to do. I was merely trying
to
> illustrate a point about script grading versus the "right" way to do
> something.
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> alsontra@hotmail.com
> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 8:08 PM
> To: Scott Morris; Joe_Deleonardo@hotmail.com; 'Fernando Rodriguez';
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Internetwork Experts CCIE Routing & Switching Lab Workbook
>
> "For example, if I simply tell you do not let 10.0.0.0/8 appear in R1's
> routing table. No other requirements, so I don't care how you do it, then
I
> will look at the result. 'sh ip ro' on R1 and if 10.0.0.0/8 is in there,
> then something is wrong. But the script won't look only for a
> distribute-list in on R1, or offset-list, or whatever other method unless
> you are told to do or not to do it in some fashion..."
>
>
> Scott are you suggesting that getting the routes to show up in table is as
> important as reachability? It's easy to comply with a full reachability
> requirement, but much more difficult to put all routes in all tables. Can
> you elaborate?
>
>
> Alsontra
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com>
> To: <Joe_Deleonardo@hotmail.com>; "'Fernando Rodriguez'"
> <fernanrl@yahoo.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 10:03 AM
> Subject: RE: Internetwork Experts CCIE Routing & Switching Lab Workbook
>
>
> > Heheheheh... I'm hardly one to complain about people being long-winded!
> > (grin)
> >
> > As for the process, there is supposed to be a committee within the CCIE
> > group that both creates and reviews the exams and weeds things out. I
> don't
> > know the specifics of it, and likely because Cisco doesn't want everyone
> > involved in their processes to that degree, but there is something! :)
> >
> > As for the "correct" answers, that's a huge misnomer and myth people
have.
> > Yes, there are scripts, but it's not like they look in your config for
> some
> > specific thing and only that specific thing unless that's what was
called
> > for. Scripts are designed to help the proctors grade.
> >
> > For example, if I simply tell you do not let 10.0.0.0/8 appear in R1's
> > routing table. No other requirements, so I don't care how you do it,
then
> I
> > will look at the result. 'sh ip ro' on R1 and if 10.0.0.0/8 is in
there,
> > then something is wrong. But the script won't look only for a
> > distribute-list in on R1, or offset-list, or whatever other method
unless
> > you are told to do or not to do it in some fashion...
> >
> > So the other important part to remember, and the hardest part, is the
> > objectivity of the grading. The no partial credit rule! So if one
thing
> is
> > messed up in a point section (typically caused by careless reading or a
> > typo, which of course is purely because of stress!) will cause you to
lose
> > point you may have thought you had. I liken this to my Service Provider
> > exam... I actually received 0% in my multicast section. I'll be damned
> if
> > my multicast didn't work! But going through in my head what was asked
on
> > the exam (of course not having it in front of me still), I saw areas
where
> I
> > could have misread things and therefore did something that I was asked
not
> > to do. So, it sucks... But... In order to not take a week to grade
every
> > single exam where the proctors say "oh, he was a bright guy, I know he
> > really meant to put this command in", these bars must be set.
> >
> > But like I said, since you answered both yes and no to the fair test
> > question... If you do believe it was at a level it shouldn't have been,
> or
> > wording was confusing or something like that, then most certainly write
to
> > them and let them know that (in a politically correct fashion!).
> Otherwise,
> > no harm no foul.
> >
> > But on the flip side, you have a study path now, and perhaps had your
> brain
> > expanded in different directions so next time will be all the much
easier!
> >
> > One very important note to remember is perspective... Through the
years,
> > not only through my own exams, but in hearing others talk... I hear of
> > exams that are REALLY hard and evil and all that. Typically this is
when
> > people don't pass. I hear about exams that are simple, or
> straightforward,
> > or too easy. These are when people pass. All in all, there isn't much
> > variation in the exams themselves. :) Sooooo.... Must be someplace
> else!
> >
> > Not to say that mistakes aren't made though.
> >
> > No go back and study! (grin) but it at least seems like you are
enjoying
> > the journey and that is an important part too! Despite nobody knowing
> what
> > a CCIE is where you're looking, you are making yourself better and I
> presume
> > that you have some job in mind as the target here... So good luck in
that
> > pursuit!
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joe Deleonardo [mailto:JoeDeleonardo@cox.net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 11:50 AM
> > To: swm@emanon.com; 'Fernando Rodriguez'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: Internetwork Experts CCIE Routing & Switching Lab Workbook
> >
> > Do I think it was an unfair test? Yes and No. No - there's nothing on
the
> > test that I hadn't had exposure to in the past, either in labs or in
real
> > life. But they really did seem to raise the bar all of a sudden. The
> > requirements really required a much deeper knowledge. That's not a
> complaint
> > or a bad thing or the unfair part. I think it's something that you have
> to
> > accept when you start this process. You will probably fail at least
once.
> > Most CCIE candidates take more then one attempt to pass. I know guys
that
> > have attempted the lab ranging between 7-13 times. I have no less
respect
> > for them because it's taking them more attempts then average. These are
> > bright guys that I'd work with any day. Part of this is luck too, you
have
> > to admit, you can just have a bad day. You can be nervous. Heck the very
> > first time I took the lab, I was so nervous I had tunnel vision and
> couldn't
> > even remember the RFC1918 addresses. That's pretty bad. The lab you get
> > might just; by luck, be on the topics that you really focused on. Like
you
> > said my next lab will have a different focus again. That's fine and good
> > thing, because I've noticed that after each lab attempt I've grown more
> > having taken in Cisco's problems and tried to figure out what they
wanted.
> > That last email was frustration and fatigue. But in a few days after
going
> > over the brain dump and maybe seeing deeper into what I missed or had
> > problems with. I'll be that much stronger next. Then they won't be able
to
> > stump me on that area next time. Let's not forget about the dumb
mistakes
> we
> > all make from time to time. If it were easy it wouldn't be worth having.
> > Right? Like you said at one point Scott, "what do they call a guy when
he
> > finished medical school?" They still call him a doctor. I guess it was
> > probably a shock, because with all the labs I took yesterday being #5, I
> got
> > the Security on #3. You sort of get a sense of where the bar is... so to
> > speak. You probably know what I mean. You can look at a topic while
> studying
> > and you can almost formulate test questions in your head.
> >
> > So it's not a bad thing if they raise the bar. I'm all for it. It will
> make
> > having it more worth all the effort. Because you know after you spend
all
> > this time and money... and my God I have spent a lot of money. I want it
> to
> > mean something. I'm pursuing the second one and I'm glad I am because
I've
> > learned a ton more from after I passed the first one. I feel like a
> > different engineer, with an entirely different perspective and when I
> > finally pass this, I'll even be more knowledgable. Which is what I
really
> > want out of this. Besides I was kind of surprised when looking for my
last
> > job after having passed the CCIE Security how many people really didn't
> know
> > what the CCIE was. So unless there is an engineer that made the request
> for
> > a CCIE to fill a job a lot of people seemed to have not even realize how
> > valuable you are having earned the CCIE.
> >
> > I do wonder what the process is for giving a lab to candidates. Do they
> come
> > together as a team and put their questions into a bank and randomly draw
> > them out. I wonder if any of the proctors actually go through the lab
with
> > out any previous knowledge of the content. That would be the best
thing,
> so
> > they could get a better idea of what a person's perceptions where of the
> > requirements.
> >
> > I ask this because I wonder how they determine their correct answer.
Every
> > security topic on this lab yesterday I had on the Security lab in one
form
> > or another - it was very comfortable material for me. I tested my
> > configurations, yet on my score report I apparently only got 25%. That
> > really through me for a loop. I got my score report last night at
11:25PM
> > PST, finishing the test at 5:05PM PST. Did they really have time to look
> at
> > my lab and maybe wonder why I did something a certain way? They do
tighten
> > down the path you must take to configure, but most of the time there's
> > always wiggle room. To fail because you wiggle one way or the other is
not
> > right... and that's what I think is not fair about the lab. They must
have
> > graded via script. How fair is that?
> >
> > How many of us would like to be able to comment on the lab while there?
> > Wouldn't it be great to cut us off from the routers at a certain time
and
> > allow us to comment on questions. Because we can all write to Cisco and
> tell
> > them what we think, but with out the actual questions as a point of
> > reference. We might be remembering a requirement wrong. We might not be
> able
> > to get our logic across to them not being able to draw on specifcs with
in
> > the problem. At this point I have a brain dump I did yes, but it's just
> that
> > a brain dump. A brain dump lacks those critical words that all CCIE lab
> > questions seem to hinge on.
> >
> > I will say that me and a couple of other candidates gave Tom feedback
> after
> > the lab about how hard we thought it was. Tom did seem bothered by that.
I
> > don't think they want to make it impossible. I think they really want
you
> to
> > pass. He said they'd be looking at the lab and may adjust it in the
> future.
> > So this new bar, may not be there to stay. I don't mind it being there,
> I'd
> > just like to know just how much harder I need to study. Now I know and I
> > think that because of that - I'll have a better opportunity next time.
If
> > the do adjust it down, then great all my extra hard work this month
should
> > pay off. If not August then there's always September. :)
> >
> > I'm really not complaining all that much. It's a great program. It's
well
> > worth the time and money. It's just my opinion - nothing more. Just
> sharing
> > my experience in hopes it will help another.
> >
> > CCID (diety huh?) :) Well I guess the reason why I mentioned the next
step
> > up for a CCIE can also come from another one of your replys. There are
> some
> > CCIEs that just know more then others. Maybe a better analogy might be
> > between a doctor and a surgeon. Both are doctors, but you'd really want
a
> > surgeon to perform an operation on you.
> >
> > And again you're right, that's why you get more then one of these and I
> > guess that's why Cisco has multiple versions.
> >
> > Who knows. All I know is I apparently need to learn more still before I
> can
> > get my second. So I need to stop with this long winded email and do
> > something more productive. :)
> >
> > Have a good one!
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Scott Morris [mailto:swm@emanon.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 6:28 AM
> > To: 'Joe Deleonardo'; 'Fernando Rodriguez'; Joe_Deleonardo@hotmail.com;
> > ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: Internetwork Experts CCIE Routing & Switching Lab Workbook
> >
> > Frustration is certainly something that can build up while prepping for
> this
> > exam. Whether from some of the seemingly inane requirements that
practice
> > labs contain, or certainly the same thing when finally getting to the
real
> > lab exam and, as you said, thinking about why anyone in their right mind
> > would ever design a network that way.
> >
> > The answer lies a little deeper than that. One of my consulting rules
is
> > that if you ever run across a network designed in the same haphazard
> fashion
> > as a CCIE lab scenario, go find whoever was responsible for it and smack
> > them soundly about their head....
> >
> > That being said, the test is not about designing insane networks. The
> test
> > is about figuring out whether your capabilities are "expert-level" or
not.
> > If you have ever done a lot of consulting, you will find that clients
> don't
> > always ask things in a straight-forward, logical, or even sane manner at
> > times.
> >
> > But in order to make something happen per the requirements given (no
> matter
> > how bizzare) you must have an in-depth understanding of the technologies
> in
> > question and what impact they may have on one another. Concepts are not
> > always easy to test. And multiple concepts trying to be tested on one
> exam
> > does not make for a good network design!
> >
> > Think about real-world networks though. Let's take frame-relay for many
> > locations in a hub and spoke arrangement. Most of us, given the choice,
> > will opt for something nice and easy like a myriad of P2P links.
Perhaps
> > not (but why not you ask? Maybe other "requirements" make that a bad
> > choice)... If the CCIE lab had you configure P2P links with different
> /30's
> > on each one, what would that test of you? That you understand Frame
> Relay?
> > That you understand some of the nuances of OSPF?
> >
> > Nope. So how do you gauge "expert-level" knowledge.
> >
> > Now, on the flip side of things, since you mention many others were in
> shock
> > as well. If you believe it was an unfair exam (beyond the testing your
> > expert-level knowledge of technologies), then let Cisco know about it!!!
> > E-mail to ccie@cisco.com and let them know your complaints. Certainly
do
> > this in a professional method and analyze what and why things were not a
> > fair test. Don't rely on someone at Cisco saying "Oh, too many people
> > failed the CCIE lab this month, we should make it easier."
> >
> > If you got a "bad" exam, I'm sorry to hear about that. The process in
> place
> > within the CCIE group should have actually prevented this from
happening.
> > But if they merely are highlighting different areas that we
(collectively)
> > haven't thought about before, then perhaps it is an interesting
adjustment
> > to make in our approach to studying.
> >
> > The items on the exam should be able to be located on the DocCD
> regardless.
> > So were they not there? Or were there simply too many to have time to
> find?
> > I don't mean to sound callous or offensive about this, but wherein lies
> the
> > problem? The exam? Or elsewhere? (And no, I'm not getting into a
> > discussion of one vendor's material versus anothers)
> >
> > Certainly your experience with this exam can give you additional items
to
> > study. At least the "focus" areas. Although you will likely find your
> next
> > lab different in terms of focus as well!
> >
> > Recertifying CCIE's in the lab? Now that would be an interesting idea.
> :)
> > Most CCIE's that I have worked with though do very well at keeping up
with
> > technologies, mostly because of the projects they become involved with.
> > Perhaps not to the level of the lab for every topic, but then again they
> > know much more about other topics than many do! :)
> >
> > A level above CCIE? Another intersting idea, but if you are called an
> > 'expert' for the CCIE, what do you call the next level? Cisco Certified
> > Internetwork Deity? :) And here I thought that is why you were going
for
> > more than one CCIE!
> >
> > Anyway, sorry to hear your disappointment with the lab this time around
as
> > well as the outcome. But I would really suggest that you share your
> > constructive criticism (because you don't have to worry about the NDA
> thing
> > when talking to ccie@cisco.com) with the folks who can really take it to
> > heart. You may or may not get a reply, but you can always hope that it
> will
> > make someone look at the lab and/or the testing statistics and rethink
> some
> > things if it truly was an unfair exam.
> >
> > Making tests at this level isn't easy! Taking them certainly isn't
> either!
> > :)
> >
> >
> > Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
CISSP,
> > JNCIP, 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
> Joe
> > Deleonardo
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 6:06 AM
> > To: 'Fernando Rodriguez'; Joe_Deleonardo@hotmail.com;
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: Internetwork Experts CCIE Routing & Switching Lab Workbook
> >
> > Oh I hope I didn't offend you when I said that. I understood what you
> meant.
> > I was just trying to say everyone's different and an individual - what I
> > require to do to pass may be twice what you require to pass.
> >
> > I went through the Hello Computers lab book all of them. I went to the
> > HelloComputers bootcamp, then failed the lab last month.
> >
> > I bought Internetwork Experts book, I went through all 20 labs,
understood
> > everything. I do think it's a great book.
> >
> > Today (er - yesterday - haven't gone to sleep yet) I took the lab and
all
> I
> > can say was that this was most difficult test I've ever taken in my
life.
> > The only word to describe it is, vicious. I've just never seen so many
> > obscure topics, with so many restrictions as to how you can and can't do
> > things, with very specific out come requirements. I got through the lab,
> but
> > didn't have enough time to go back over the whole thing to look for
errors
> > or to go back to what I had skipped.
> >
> > It's not like I didn't prepare. My notes only had one thing in them that
I
> > had forgotten a detail about. One little detail out of the whole lab is
> not
> > bad. What was so different was the level of complexity and depth. This
lab
> > made my last R&S lab look like an absolute piece of cake. I wasn't
alone -
> > other candidates on the way out were all in shock. It was a brand new
> lab -
> > you could tell because all the plastic was shiny and the paper was
printer
> > fresh. Maybe they'll make adjustments to it when they see just how hard
> > people see this lab to be. I know Cisco wants to make this difficult.
> Heck,
> > I want Cisco to make this difficult. But if they make it impossible then
> who
> > will want to even risk their money.
> >
> > I really feel that if Cisco wanted to make another level up beyond the
> CCIE
> > this test today would have been a good candidate. You know what they
could
> > do is have CCIE's that recertify on paper only and CCIE's that recertify
> in
> > the lab.... maybe at a reduced cost to the CCIE. We all know this
> technology
> > changes... what? Every 6-12 months there's a new major IOS revision. I
> doubt
> > all CCIEs really keep up with it.
> >
> > All I wish is that the lab would be more real world. I think that would
> make
> > the CCIE much more valuable. Some of the requirements I read today made
me
> > think right away, "why would you ever want to do that!" There's just so
> > many ways to do things and just because I know every trivial pursuit
type
> > command/method doesn't necessarily make me a better engineer.
> >
> > I feel at a loss at this point. My only idea at this point is to do what
> > some body else posted on this board - read through all of the Cisco
> > Documentation and try to learn the important details that I'm missing.
> >
> > OK well, blah, blah, blah, just blowing off steam and frustration.
> >
> > Good luck to you!
> >
> > Joe
> > CCIE Security 12391
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > Fernando Rodriguez
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 2:38 AM
> > To: Joe_Deleonardo@hotmail.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: Internetwork Experts CCIE Routing & Switching Lab Workbook
> >
> > Hi Joe and everyone,
> >
> > I can tell you this is not a shortcut. I have been studying a lot during
a
> > long while, attended bootcamp, reviewed everything and went for the
> > lab...and failed.
> > What I4m looking for is a book that provides me with similar challenges
to
> > the lab and give me a clear explanation on why things are done in a
> certain
> > way and not other. I have some time to study at work and have also a
> > work-lab to "play" with...but no VoIP nor ATM but I can always mess
around
> > with customers routers and, should something go wrong, blame on Cisco
IOS
> > new features being developed hehehe
> >
> > So no, I am not looking a shortcut...I am just trying to easy the pain
of
> > this long path.
> >
> > ...and yes, you are right...I can not afford "a proctor" but if all of
us
> > put a small amount of..."peanuts" we could get our "Groupstudy
> > proctor"...just a naughty thought hehehe
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Fernando
> >
> > --- Joe Deleonardo <JoeDeleonardo@cox.net> escribis: > That really all
> > depends on you. Everyone learns at
> > > different speeds. You
> > > also have to take into account your real life experience, etc.
> > >
> > > Internetwork Experts book is great, but it's not a short cut. No book
> > > out there is a short cut. Don't kid yourself, there is absolutely no
> > > way to short cut the CCIE... well short of paying a proctor more money
> > > then any of us probably have to just pass you. But if you had that
> > > much money why bother with the CCIE? ;)
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> > > [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Fernando Rodriguez
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 12:30 AM
> > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: Internetwork Experts CCIE Routing & Switching Lab Workbook
> > >
> > > Hi all again,
> > > I4m about to purchase the aforementioned book. I was thinking about
> > > how long I would need in normal circunstances to have a good look at
> > > it and practice enough in order to finish it and book my lab.
> > > Thanks as always,
> > >
> > > Fernando
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > Yahoo! lanza su nueva tecnologma de bzsquedas ?te atreves a comparar?
> > > http://busquedas.yahoo.es
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > Yahoo! lanza su nueva tecnologma de bzsquedas ?te atreves a comparar?
> > http://busquedas.yahoo.es
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > 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 : Sun Aug 01 2004 - 10:11:55 GMT-3