From: Tom Lijnse (Tom.Lijnse@globalknowledge.nl)
Date: Thu Nov 18 2004 - 05:06:45 GMT-3
<RANT>
Hi Rick,
Of course you can claim that without violating the NDA. Simply making
claims out of the blue without explaining how you came to this marvelous
insight can never be considered breaking the NDA.
All I was saying (if you even bothered to read my post) is that if
somebody would make a statement on this list as to if RIPv1 was on the
specific exam that they took, it could be considered an NDA violation.
For reference have a look at:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/learning/le3/ccie/exam/violation_rules.html
Even though this is not the actual agreement itself it pretty clearly
states:
- Discussions concerning test content with anyone other than the proctor
without express written permission from the CCIE department
- Posting of test content to study groups internal to Cisco or external
to Cisco with the exception of ccie-lab@cisco.com
- Forwarding of test information to persons or companies without the
express written permission of the CCIE program
Of course making statements about a certain topic (like RIPv1) being on
your test would be a very minor infraction and I don't think Cisco would
come after you in full force.
Of course I could be wrong here. I'm not a lawyer, but please be kind
enough to point out exactly where my reasoning goes wrong instead of
making blanket statements and claiming I have never read the NDA (which
of course I did when I took the test, though I must admit I may not
remember every single word since I had other things to exercise my
brains with that day).
Regards,
Tom
</RANT>
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Rick
Sent: donderdag 18 november 2004 1:48
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: RIPv1 - yes or no
It appears most of the people who claim something violates the NDA has
never
read it. I will say very loud and clear, without violating the NDA, that
RIPv1 is not on the CCIE R&S lab.
Rick
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Matus" <jmatus@pacbell.net>
To: "Joseph D. Phillips" <josephdphillips@fastmail.us>; "Tom Lijnse"
<Tom.Lijnse@globalknowledge.nl>; "Ivan Ostre9" <ivan.ostres@snt.hr>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: RIPv1 - yes or no
> i'll have to disagree with joe on part of this........yes, it is off
of
the
> exam, but i think it is worth understanding how it works and all of
it's
> 'flaws'. i think you gain a better understanding of true routing by
using
> ripv1 than with ripv2 because of the problems associated with, or the
lack
> thereof, vlsm's....
>
>
> Regards,
>
> John D. Matus
> MCSE, CCNP
> Office: 818-782-2061
> Cell: 818-430-8372
> jmatus@pacbell.net
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joseph D. Phillips" <josephdphillips@fastmail.us>
> To: "Tom Lijnse" <Tom.Lijnse@globalknowledge.nl>; "Ivan Ostre9"
> <ivan.ostres@snt.hr>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:43 AM
> Subject: Re: RIPv1 - yes or no
>
>
> > RIPv1 was taken off the lab over a year ago. This is not a violation
of
> > the
> > NDA. I've taken it four times and the proctor specifically states
before
> > you
> > take the exam that there's no RIPv1. Don't worry about it. Don't
study
it.
> > Let it die.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tom Lijnse" <Tom.Lijnse@globalknowledge.nl>
> > To: "Ivan Ostre9" <ivan.ostres@snt.hr>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:07 AM
> > Subject: RE: RIPv1 - yes or no
> >
> >
> >> Hi Ivan,
> >>
> >> I think nobody except Cisco could confirm something like that. It
is
not
> > on the blueprint, but it is also not specifically excluded (like for
> > instance Token Ring and IGRP). Therefore it is in a grey area where
it
> > would
> > be fair game on the lab, though Cisco probably does not consider it
a
core
> > topic, since it's not in the blueprint.
> >>
> >> The only way to way to really confirm that it is or is not on the
lab
> > would be by people breaking the NDA to tell you if they had it on
their
> > specific lab or not. And even then it could always be introduced or
left
> > out
> > of future labs at Cisco's will, since it is not on the list of
excluded
> > topics and is configurable on the equipment.
> >>
> >> On the other hand, I personally feel that anybody who is
comfortable
with
> > IP (VLSM, subnetting, summarization) and the IP Routing protocols at
the
> > CCIE level should have the skills to deal with RIPv1. Just practice
with
> > it
> > for a bit to get a feel for typical peculiarities of a classfull
protocol,
> > but don't spend weeks on it.
> >>
> >> Of course this is just my personal interpretation of Cisco's
published
> > guidelines, so I'd definitely be interested to hear what other
people
> > think
> > of this.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Tom Lijnse
> >>
> >> CCIE #11031
> >> Global Knowledge Netherlands
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
Behalf Of
> > Ivan Ostre9
> >> Sent: woensdag 17 november 2004 13:17
> >> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >> Subject: RIPv1 - yes or no
> >>
> >> Hello GS,
> >>
> >> I just have seen on
> >>
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/learning/le3/ccie/rs/lab_exam_blueprint.html
> > that
> >> RIPv1 is NOT in the Lab blueprint. Can someone confirm for sure
that
> >> RIPv1
> >> is/is not on the lab?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Ivan
> >>
> >> P.S: If it's not, I'll miss those FSLM/VSLM shit... :-)
> >>
> >> [GroupStudy removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which
had
a
> > name of winmail.dat]
> >>
> >>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Dec 02 2004 - 06:57:47 GMT-3