From: Hoogen (hoogen82@gmail.com)
Date: Fri Jun 08 2007 - 08:18:35 ART
Darby,
With all the hardwork you are doing I am sure you would be rewarded soon,
hopefully your reread itself might give you the good news.
_hoogen
On 6/8/07, Darby Weaver <darbyweaver@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Chika,
>
> Amen - Almost exactly how I felt this past lab attempt
> - my third.
>
> So much so, I paid for the re-grade. Still waiting.
> I feel something must have went wrong with the grading
> process.
>
> I remembered my lab diagram and I got back and drew it
> out again for personal study and review - I even
> remembered the IP Addressing and most of the actual
> vlan assignments.
>
> Then there was the issue of remembering each task and
> I even remembered and wrote very nearly everyone and
> what I used for an answer.
>
> I had plenty of time, I thought the lab was just easy,
> even too easy.
>
> I used the DOC CD for about 1/2 of the tasks, about
> 25% I knew cold and off the top of my head. I asked
> for clarification at least 20 or 25 items and I mean
> down to the capitalization and "spaces" - anything
> that was subject to interpretation was on my list of
> things to be wary of.
>
> I did not get my results till 9:56am the next morning
> and it did not say pass. So I tallied my points,
> reviewed what I had wrote down for questions and
> answers and started to reverse-engineer my score down
> to almost exactly each section and each item.
>
> I only had 2 tasks I did not attempt for 5 points and
> one was a logical time consumer (at least for me) and
> the other was something I could not think of though I
> knew.
>
> Both were in the same category.
>
> Nope... I've still got my fingers crossed, feet,
> toes, and eyes.
>
> This was my easiest lab (at least I had thought so,
> until I saw my score), which was categorically the
> lowest score I had yet to receive on any full lab
> (except maybe 1 other). This also made me think about
> what could have gone wrong.
>
> I mean one should not fail a lab as "straight forward"
> as the lab I encountered and not even get points for
> the basic stuff - right? And when I say basic, I mean
> down right basic. If so, it may be time to hand in my
> all my asociate and professional level credentials and
> just start over with Juniper.
>
> Juniper is offering free training and certification
> exams for most of the rest of the year by the way.
>
> Now, that is not to say that I could not have seen a
> scenario where I might have failed due to
> interpretation, but should this have been the result,
> it should also have been a very very close fail and
> not my lowest to date scoring - this means that all
> those points that were just there and had no strings
> to them would have had to have been just plain wrong.
> While possible - I have trouble believing this.
>
> Patience is a virtue and mine is being tried - about
> 1/2 way through the waiting process.
>
> I have assumed Cisco is right and I have failed, so I
> rescheduled a lab for December and I re-evaluated what
> I am doing and possibly what I am STILL doing wrong
> and made myself a battle plan that calls for about
> ~700 hours of actual lab hours.
>
> This time I am strictly keeping myself to NMC's DoIT
> Labs - about 1 per week - I love their CheckIT
> grading/verification system and then about 1 lab from
> H.U.'s labs that I received, though more time
> consuming to perform than anyone else's they do teach
> one to be mindful of speed and accuracy - valuable
> skills. I figure 1 per month of these with
> review/verification/setup etc. ought to be about
> right.
>
> Altogether it will be tough but it will be worth it in
> the end I'm hoping.
>
> So about 6 months and about 36 labs to work through.
>
> I figure I'll also revisit the lectures from the IE
> COD and spend quite a bit of time reviewing NLI's
> Golden Labs and workbooks for any sore spots.
>
> The Cisco UNIVERCD will be used for everything
> including at work.
>
> I have not used aliases yet in a real lab and I think
> I might want to from here out, so I have started
> loading them at work and should be familiar with them
> by my next lab showing.
>
> I had already started to debug just about everything
> and am pretty comfortable with debugging stuff now,
> but I am going to be even more mindful of my debugging
> efforts.
>
> Basically, I'm stepping my game up a level (funny
> since I kinda thought I had already done this - deja
> vu).
>
> Working closely with a co-worker and having daily
> discussions literally at the bit level does have its
> advantages so this is helpful as well and 6 months
> more of it cannot hurt. His advice and perspective on
> troubleshooting OSPF was like no one's I had heard
> before and really was quite "common sense" if you
> think about it. His advice about BGP is quite
> inightful as well. He loses me when he starts talking
> about light refraction as it applies to fiber-optic
> media, but hey... if it is a security hole...
>
> I have yet to go to any company provided training yet
> this year and I still have 1.5 weeks of vacation to
> use to pursue either training or intense personal
> development. So maybe...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- chika acha <achachika@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Was hoping i was only gonna post this when i
> > pass,...but i'm left with no
> > choice. I went in for my lab on the 24th of may,
> > 2007. Before then, i had
> > studied pretty hard....for over 11/12 months. My
> > first 6 months of studies,
> > i was doing an average of 14-18hrs a day (stopped
> > working)...and at that
> > point, it seemed like the more i studied the harder
> > it became....but after a
> > while, i got really used to the feeling, and started
> > working 7 months later.
> > Before i went it, i met some guys that had theirs
> > lined up as well,..so we
> > studied extensively for over 5 weeks........doing
> > and average of 4/5 hrs a
> > day, while i still carved out time to study on my
> > own. A week to my exam, i
> > was feeling realy nervous, but in the same vein, i
> > was fired up....cos my
> > knowledge of the core topics were spot-on....(so i
> > thot). I traveled to
> > Brussels with nothing but my little note that i've
> > had for over
> > 10months....no laptop...nothing. Trust me, i was
> > pretty nervous that night,
> > that i found it hard to sleep. But when i got to
> > Cisco Systems, the
> > atmosphere wasn't really that bad. When i started my
> > lab, i seemed pretty
> > tense,...but after a few hours, i was on top of my
> > game........everything
> > seemed to work pretty well.......the questions were
> > just plain english, that
> > i wondered y it was. I had some issues before lunch,
> > but i was able to think
> > them thru during lunch, and i finally got them
> > working.....truth is....I
> > THOT I NAILED IT! Came out feeling really
> > confident...only for me to get
> > home and BAMM!!!! I was down for the count.....i
> > failed!! I said to
> > myself....."wot did i do wrong? what else can i
> > provide for cisco to make me
> > a CCIE?" at that point, i thot it was just too
> > impossible to to make CCIE. I
> > almost lost hope doing it again, but man..........i
> > dont want to believe at
> > this stage that cisco just tries to be calous to
> > some people...if that be
> > the case, then we'd rightly say cisco has got it's
> > preference....and i dont
> > want to believe that. I'm going in on the 17th of
> > July for as second
> > round........and it doesnt end there. I know i
> > should save this till i make
> > CCIE, but i'll go ahead anyway.........thanks Brians
> > for your wonderful CoD
> > and IE workbooks.
> >
> > On 6/7/07, anthony.sequeira@thomson.com
> > <anthony.sequeira@thomson.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Yeah - I have posted this before and I want to
> > throw it out there
> > > again...why did it take me (an obvious genius ;-))
> > 5 times to pass?
> > >
> > > Here are some of the reasons:
> > >
> > > 1) I had a bunch of disposable cash at the time
> > and became "addicted" to
> > > trying the lab whether I was ready or not. Let's
> > call it the Brute Force
> > > method. P.S. My employer at the time paid for two
> > of the attempts. The
> > > first and the last.
> > >
> > > 2) I dragged my feet on truly addressing my weak
> > areas. I really enjoyed
> > > studying certain areas (IGPs), but detested others
> > (Multicast). As a
> > > result of my feelings, I did not study Multicast
> > like I should.
> > >
> > > 3) I failed to embrace many of the tips shared on
> > this group. For
> > > example, on one of the attempts I did not sleep at
> > all the night before.
> > >
> > >
> > > 4) I am not good at this type of an exam.
> > >
> > > There are other reasons, but I will stop there for
> > now. Don't let these
> > > things happen to you!
> > >
> > > Anthony J. Sequeira
> > > #15626
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Gary Duncanson
> > [mailto:gary.duncanson@googlemail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 10:01 AM
> > > To: Sequeira, Anthony (NETg)
> > > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: Re: 2nd Attempt Curse
> > >
> > > A friend of mine passed at the 5th attempt. A good
> > engineer. Nothing to
> > > be
> > > ashamed of that. Depends what you get on the day
> > often times. No one
> > > knows
> > > it all.
> > >
> > > Gary
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <anthony.sequeira@thomson.com>
> > > To: <smorris@ipexpert.com>;
> > <eric_dobyns@yahoo.com>;
> > > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 2:25 AM
> > > Subject: RE: 2nd Attempt Curse
> > >
> > >
> > > > "The level of "easy" or "hard" is certainly
> > relative..." Yes indeed -
> > > if
> > > > you happen to draw topics X, Y, and Z in section
> > Q and you are weak in
> > > > those areas - you will think it is the hardest
> > test imaginable.
> > > >
> > > > After passing on the fifth attempt - I firmly
> > believe there is
> > > > absolutely NOTHING to the rumors you heard.
> > > >
> > > > Anthony J. Sequeira
> > > > #15626
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> > [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > > Of
> > > > Scott Morris
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 8:56 PM
> > > > To: 'Eric Dobyns'; 'Cisco certification'
> > > > Subject: RE: 2nd Attempt Curse
> > > >
> > > > And here I thought it was that the second one
> > was supposed to be
> > > easier!
> > > > (I passed second time)
> > > >
> > > > The level of "easy" or "hard" is certainly
> > relative... And keep in
> > > mind
> > > > that most people who fail the exam come out
> > thinking it was "hard".
> > > > Most
> > > > who pass come out thinking it was "fair and
> > balanced".
> > > >
> > > > ;)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Scott Morris, CCIE4
> > (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
> > > > JNCIE
> > > > #153, CISSP, et al.
> > > > CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-J
> > > > VP - Technical Training - IPexpert, Inc.
> > > > IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
> > > >
> > > > A Cisco Learning Partner - We Accept Learning
> > Credits!
> > > >
> > > > smorris@ipexpert.com
> > > >
> > > > Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
> > > > Fax: +1.810.454.0130
> > > > http://www.ipexpert.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> > [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > > Of
> > > > Eric
> > > > Dobyns
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 8:47 PM
> > > > To: 'Cisco certification'
> > > > Subject: 2nd Attempt Curse
> > > >
> > > > Any truth to the rumour that Cisco gives the
> > hardest test for those
> > > who
> > > > are
> > > > on their 2nd attempt? I've heard the throw a
> > relatively easy test out
> > > > first, which people usually fail for poor time
> > management, and then
> > > > throw
> > > > the hardest out on the 2nd attempt, which is why
> > those that pass are
> > > > usually
> > > > on their 3rd or 4th try. Anyone else
> > agree/disagree?
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jul 01 2007 - 17:24:47 ART