From: Darby Weaver (darbyweaver@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Apr 17 2007 - 21:02:29 ART
Thanks again Eric.
:)
--- Eric.Stuhl@ferguson.com wrote:
> I wish you the best of luck. I know you've been
> working hard, but I've
> seen you seem way more focused on the tips you'd
> learn from a bootcamp
> than the underlying technology. Each vendor says
> basically the same
> things. It's up to you to really push yourself.
>
> Read the command reference guide. Read the config
> guides. Ignore the
> practice labs, they're probably hurting you more
> than they're helping at
> this point. You know everything you're going to
> learn from them. Learn
> the commands that you don't know already. Relate
> everything to a real
> world situation. Make sure you'd know why you'd
> implement something in
> your network. Imagine how it can break. Blah .. .
> you know all of this
> already. I just think if you spent as much time
> copying the command
> reference guide as you do drafting email to
> groupstudy, you would have
> passed months ago..
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darby Weaver [mailto:darbyweaver@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 12:55 PM
> To: Eric Stuhl - 0018 HQ
> Subject: RE: Close but no Cigar (You Asked - the
> Vendor Bakeoff)
>
> You are right.
>
> I'm almost burnt out. Waiting for a date to come.
> Can't get an earlier date anyway.
>
> Should spend more time hammering my little list of
> 25
> or so items I still think I do not know as well as I
> like and find the other ones I've probably forgotten
> by now.
>
> :)
>
> No problem, might sound cruel by others, but I know
> what you mean.
>
> Thanks,
>
> I am way to addicted to that list. Guess I'll
> unsubscribe to curb that addiction and spend more
> time
> ironing out my last issues.
>
>
> --- Eric.Stuhl@ferguson.com wrote:
>
> > I'm sorry, I probably woke up on the wrong side of
> > the bed this morning,
> > but it might behoove you to listen more and talk
> > less.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Darby Weaver [mailto:darbyweaver@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 12:43 PM
> > To: Eric Stuhl - 0018 HQ
> > Subject: RE: Close but no Cigar (You Asked - the
> > Vendor Bakeoff)
> >
> > Ouch!
> >
> > But probably very true.
> >
> > Point taken.
> >
> > Thanks Eric.
> >
> > Darby
> > --- Eric.Stuhl@ferguson.com wrote:
> >
> > > Darby,
> > >
> > > The day you get the CCIE is the day the
> program
> > > has completely
> > > failed. I'd take a minute and reread the quote
> by
> > > Colin Powell that you
> > > attached to one of your earlier emails. You've
> > > mastered the art of
> > > looking for the quick fix and you have an
> amazing
> > > vocabulary of
> > > technical buzzwords and a rather voluminous
> > > repository of training
> > > manifestos and catch phrases. Unfortunately, I
> > have
> > > yet to see any true
> > > understanding of what you have learned. I sat
> next
> > > to you in one
> > > vendor's class for 5 days and heard you give lip
> > > service to all the
> > > techniques that were espoused, but when it came
> > time
> > > to actually sit
> > > down and immerse yourself in the technology you
> > seem
> > > to lack the desire
> > > or ability to continue to that next step.
> > >
> > > It shouldn't be an eye opening experience to
> > > learn that in order to
> > > pass the CCIE lab, one must be careful and one
> > must
> > > truly understand
> > > theory and practice of technology. You've been
> on
> > > this path for years,
> > > if you're just now learning one of the first
> > steps,
> > > I can only imagine
> > > how much longer it will take you to implement
> that
> > > knowledge.
> > >
> > > To the vendors that you support with your
> > > infatiguable training
> > > budget, I apologize for "tapping on the glass".
> As
> > a
> > > poker player, I
> > > would typically never alert a fish to the fact
> > that
> > > he's a fish, but the
> > > increased level of complete and utter garbage
> that
> > > has been spewed into
> > > groupstudy has made it difficult for me to even
> > sift
> > > through the
> > > remaining email to find anything of value.
> > >
> > >
> > > Eric Stuhl
> > >
> > > CCIE 16349
> > > Senior Network Engineer
> > > Wolseley North American Division * 12500
> Jefferson
> > > Avenue * Newport News
> > > * VA * 23602-4314
> > >
> > > T: +1 (757) 969 4146 * F: +1 (757) 989 2505
> > >
> > > www.wolseley.com
> > > Wolseley plc registered office Parkview 1220
> > > Arlington Business Park
> > > Theale Nr Reading RG7 4GA United Kingdom
> > > Registration No. 29846 England
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> > > [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > > Darby Weaver
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 9:23 AM
> > > To: smorris@ipexpert.com;
> > > Sean.Zimmerman@clubcorp.com;
> > > ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: RE: Close but no Cigar (You Asked - the
> > > Vendor Bakeoff)
> > >
> > > But these are not statistics or percentages.
> > >
> > > These are actual people who bought or attended
> > > training and actually
> > > passed.
> > >
> > > It is also what some vendors use for marketing
> > > purposes.
> > >
> > > Don't worry - I'll be a CCIE before too long and
> > may
> > > be up for hire...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Scott Morris <smorris@ipexpert.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > So in other words this is study with a margin
> of
> > > error in the +/-
> > > > 3000% range then.
> > > >
> > > > Statistics are always interesting creatures,
> but
> > > ones that should be
> > > > put in proper cages.
> > > >
> > > > :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Scott Morris, CCIE4
> > (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service
> > > > Provider) #4713, JNCIE
> > > > #153, CISSP, et al.
> > > > CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-J
> > > > IPexpert VP - Curriculum Development
> > > > IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
> > > > smorris@ipexpert.com
> > > > http://www.ipexpert.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> > > > [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > Darby
> > > Weaver
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 9:03 AM
> > > > To: Sean.Zimmerman@clubcorp.com;
> > > > ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > Subject: Re: Close but no Cigar (You Asked -
> the
> > > Vendor Bakeoff)
> > > >
> > > > Sean,
> > > >
> > > > Here's some "digits" for you just pulled from
> > each
> > > vendor's website:
> > > >
> > > > To be fair - I started with late February to
> > start
> > > the numbers from -
> > > > recall some vendors have 10 years and some
> have
> > > less years.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> ====================================================
> > > >
> > > > Now I picked on Nick Griffin and used his
> number
> > > since he passed in
> > > > Late February as a baseline to grab these
> > numbers
> > > - and since he is on
> > >
> > > > the roster of more than a couple of vendors.
> (No
> > > offense Nick)
> > > >
> > > > The truth is - it is hard to tell who made the
> > > difference with each
> > > > candidate since many use a lot of materials
> from
> > > different vendors and
> > >
> > > > each vendor claims each CCIE who purchased
> their
> > > materials.
> > > >
> > > > Now each vendor may also have other CCIE's who
> > did
> > > not "call in" their
> > >
> > > > number as well so it could be listed - I
> cannot
> > > account for that since
> > >
> > > > it is not listed.
> > > >
> > > > Some vendors sell their products cheaply and
> > thus
> > > have a higher market
> > >
> > > > share as well and this is not reflected -
> think
> > > ratio.
> > > >
> > > > Some trainers/vendors do not list or it is
> hard
> > to
> > > find their current
> > > > CCIE's (like IEMentor) - sorry.
> > > >
> > > > Some trainers cannot post ther students or
> don't
> > > post their students
> > > > (say like Paul Borghese for instance who can
> > > probably claim a lot if
> > > > the GS list itself counts at all).
> > > >
> > > > Lots of things to consider.
> > > >
> > > > It also does not consider how much help a
> > > candidate may have recived
> > > > from others or vendors on GS, some vendors and
> > > their employees do
> > > > quite a bit on GS to answer lingering
> questions
> > > and sometimes very
> > > > critical specific questions and scenarios.
> > > >
> > > > I can say that you need to read my posts and
> > look
> > > at this list from
> > > > the past
> > > > 2 months or so and draw your own conclusions -
> > > some said I was biased
> > > > - the numbers are what they are.
> > > >
> > > > Remember there is no accounting for ratio, but
> > if
> > > ratio were important
> > >
> > > > to you, you would be well-advised to look
> twice
> > or
> > > even three times if
> > >
> > > > you missed a very simple fact.
> > > >
> > > > So when you see class-only or one-on-one it is
> > > hard but there classes
> > > > and tutelege are sparse and they rarely have
> > large
> > > classes to draw
> > > > success stories from.
> > > >
> > > > If three go in and three come out CCIE's, what
> > can
> > > I tell you.
> > > >
> > > > And there's a training center in China called
> > > www.ccxx.net with
> > > > several month programs of study that simply
> > builds
> > > CCIE's eventually.
> > > >
> > > > Oh yes - I did not count anyone I (or others)
> > may
> > > have worked with -
> > > > wink wink... You know who you are. :)
> > > >
> > > > No accounting for personal study friends or
> > > study-groups either.
> > > >
> > > > ==============================================
> > > >
> > > > 1. IE - 21 CCIE's (Assumes RS)
> WB/Class/COD/More
> > > >
> > > > 2. NMC - 12 CCIE's (Assumes RS) WB/Class/Some
> > > COD/Book
> > > >
> > > > 3. HU - 10 CCIE's (Assumes RS) (No Workbook
> Just
> > > > In-Class)
> > > >
> > > > 4. NLI / CCBOOTCAMP - 5 RS / 3 Voice (Hot for
> > > > Voice)WB/Class/Mini-WorkBooks/More
> > > >
> > > > 5. IPEXPERT - 3 RS and 1 Voice
> WB/Class/COD/More
> > > >
> > > > 6. CyscoExpert - 3 RS (One-on-One Training)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > =============================================
> > > >
> > > > IE: 21 (some are listed with other vendors)
> > > >
> > > > #17746 Joselito Nunez
> > > > #17623 Craig Middlebrooks
> > > > #17613 Jerald Hulbert
> > > > #17610 Antonio Martin
> > > > #17590 Mark Rushby
> > > > #17582 Mandebis Ably
> > > > #17561 Luqman Kondeth
> > > > #17559 Ram Patla
> > > > #17518 Andre Serrao
> > > > #17516 Clifton Folkerts
> > > > #17474 Kemal Haydar
> > > > #17471 Colm O'Leary
> > > > #17457 Robert Watson
> > > > #17447 Vlaho Jemin
> > > > #17439 Michael Marran
> > > > #17409 Jim White
> > > > #17403 Vladimir Starovatov
> > > > #17401 Jeff Stevenson
> > > > #17390 Abhi Gupta
> > > > #17389 Luke Lambert
> > > > #17381 Nick Griffin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > NMC: 12 RS
> > > >
> > > > Joselito Nunez CCIE# 17746
> > > > Craig Middlebrooks CCIE# 17623
> > > > Jerald Hulbert CCIE# 17613
> > > > Mandebis Ably CCIE# 17582
> > > > Luqman Kondeth CCIE# 17561
> > > > Andre Serrao CCIE# 17518
> > > > Terry Smith CCIE# 17499
> > > > Aaron Aday CCIE# 17475
> > > > Prio Utomo CCIE# 17431
> > > > Peter Mesjar CCIE# 17428
> > > > Marcel Roy CCIE# 17418
> > > > Nick Griffin CCIE# 17381
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > IPExpert: 3 RS and 1 Voice
> > > >
> > > > Andre Serrao CCIE #17518 (R&S)
> > > > Peter Mesjar CCIE #17428 (R&S)
> > > > Alejandro Alejo CCIE #17391 (Voice)
> > > > Nick Griffin CCIE #17381 (R&S)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > CCBOOTCAMP: 5 RS / 3 Voice
> > > >
> > > > Luqman Kondeth 17561 (R&S)
> > > > Sebastian Pasternacki 17541 (R&S)
> > > > Robert Hugo 17494 (Voice)
> > > > Robert Watson 17457 (R&S)
> > > > Jim White 17409 (R&S)
> > > > Alejandro Alejo 17391 (Voice)
> > > > Nick Griffin 17381 (R&S)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > HU: (Note no workbooks - only classes and some
> > > with only 1 or 2
> > > > students) 10
> > > >
> > > > 17409, 17470, 17517, 17540, 17612, 17637,
> 17651,
> > > 17652, 17711, 17746
> > > >
> > > > CyscoExpert: 3 RS? (One-on-One Training)
> > > >
> > > > Terry Smith, CCIE #17499
> > > > Clifton Folkerts, CCIE #17516
> > > > Wageh Eid, CCIE #17569
> > > >
> > > > --- Sean.Zimmerman@clubcorp.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just found out at 1:00 AM this morning that
> I
> > > > failed my third attempt
> > > > > at San Jose. I'm tempted to submit for a
> > reread,
> > > > but I'm a little
> > > > > discouraged by that 0.5% statistic.
> > Yesterday's
> > > > lab seemed easy, I
> > > > > only had to skip 5 points worth of sections
> > and
> > > I
> > > > finished about an
> > > > > hour early. I really thought that I'd nailed
> > it.
> > > I
> > > > wasn't certain
> > > > > about a
> > > > > 2 point category, but
> > > > > it turned out that I got it based on my
> score
> > > > report, so based off my
> > > > > point tracking, I should've scored with a
> 95%.
> > > > Less than 80% seemed
> > > > > impossible.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm thinking about trying a different
> > workbook.
> > > > I'm using IPExpert V9
> > > > > right now, and I don't have the proctor
> guide.
> > > > I've been flying
> > > > > through (most of) those labs, and my configs
> > > match
> > > > the final configs.
> > > > > Nothing against IPExpert, but I think it
> would
> > > be
> > > > good to change the
> > > > > scene just a little. I attended an IPExpert
> > > > bootcamp with the infamous
> > > > > and extremely knowledgeable Scott Morris
> back
> > in
> > > > November, and I've
> > > > > heard that you're supposed to use a
> different
> > > > Vendor's workbook than
> > > > > the one providing the bootcamp. I'm
> > considering
> > > IE
> > > > or NM, anyone have
> > > > > any recommendations? I'm strongly
> considering
> > IE
> > > > because it includes
> > > > > the solutions/proctor guide and they seem to
> > be
> > > > listing a lot of
> > > > > CCIE's right now.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 01 2007 - 08:28:36 ART