From: Scott Morris (smorris@ipexpert.com)
Date: Mon Jun 18 2007 - 09:41:14 ART
CCIE Ghost Whisperers? ;)
While personally, I would expect the troubleshooting portion to expand a
bit, the ideas where I see it going have nothing to do with live,
intermittant, random things being injected. That would be unfair on many
levels.
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
Digital Yemeni
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 8:31 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: RE: RE : Attack by Proctor
While it's VERY unreasonable for something like this to happen, the only
worry is that spreading of these rumors may make them come for real one
day!! :) I guess some guys are just stressed before even entering the lab!!
;-) If anyone has this amount of stress before even getting into the real
thing i would assure you that he/she can see ghosts on the lab booklet as
well! :)
On 6/18/07, Scott Morris <smorris@ipexpert.com> wrote:
>
> While obviously it's hard to track things like that, I'd venture to
> say there's nothing the proctor has to gain by doing things like that
> mid-config. If they wanted to make you fail, they could just wait
> until the end of the exam and change whatever they felt like changing.
>
> While troubleshooting IS indeed part of the testing process, it's
> fairly well spelled out. And from what I remember reading in
> Maurillio's Ask-the-Expert Q&A session on NetPro, it was specifically
> mentioned about the problems in startup configs and not ongoing changes
introduced.
>
> Depending on your process of configuration, (e.g. cut 'n' paste) I'd
> say there's a myriad of possibilities to introduce errors like that
> all by yourself without any outside intervention.
>
> No offense to anyone who mentions this has happened to them, but it's
> just not plausible. If the proctor had it out for you, in that they
> wanted you to fail, there are so many other ways to do it without
> introducing the potential of getting caught that this makes no sense.
>
>
> 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 wjoh71@gmail.com
> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 3:55 AM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: RE: RE : Attack by Proctor
>
> Hello,
>
> I also had the same problem. 30 minutes before the end of exam in
> BRUSSELS, I noticed a couple of changes in the routers and switches.
> For example,
>
> 1. network statement (ip address ) under ospf got changed.
> 2. area 1 nssa kept in the other router though i configured in the
> right router.
> 3. additional eigrp process was running in the router.
>
> I am not sure whether these are part of exam troubleshooting or these
> are introduced by the proctors intentionally to make the candidates to
fail.
> Could any one comment on this?.
>
> thanks,
> Joh
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _ 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
>
-- Best Regards! Digital, CCIE# to be assigned by Cisco when it collects enough $$ out of me! :p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jul 01 2007 - 17:24:49 ART