From: Darby Weaver (darbyweaver@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Oct 10 2007 - 02:00:16 ART
Let's see...
Brute Force - Going every 30 days that would be brute
force.
Now Brad/scott make some very strong points and ones
that Cisco should take note of:
1. Having a pre-lab qualifier exam like the CCIE
Assessor should be an goal that can be accomplished
with today's technology.
- Just a brief 4 hour exam - If you cannot pass it,
you cannot pass the lab anyway - so why not let the
masses spend their time trying to get the first 50
points under control at say $200.00 or so versus
$1400.00 or so.
- The exams would not be prone to "leakage" either,
since you just cut the pipeline.
2. Have a cut score, remember the lab candidate just
passed at least say 80% of the first 50 points, so
he/she ought to be able to get at least 40 point on
the real lab at this point, if not, give the poor guy
a break and let him/her take 3-6 months time to cool
down and go over the ropes again.
- Some will say this is not fair to the people who
score like 78%... This does not include those people,
either allow those who score above 40 (50% of the
required passing score) to come again in 30 days as it
is now - or make them wait 60-90 days (lots of gold
partnerships may suffer as a result).
3. This would cut down on the "real-lab sites" ability
to produce their products and even further reduce the
likelihood that a person might remotely get a lab that
resembles a previous attempt.
4. I'm not a CCIE yet, so this would affect me - if it
were implemented and it might cost me even more time
than I have alread spent. But for the good of the
entire program I think it would be worthwhile.
5. I did not say do away with the Written Exam, but I
do beleive the Written Exam for CCIE RS ought to have
the topics that are on the Written Exam, having MPLS
(Service Provider) or WLAN (not tested in the lab) is
probably not a good benchmark for CCIE candidates and
may serve to confuse and waste their prep time while
working on the CCIE RS Lab. I do think a WLAN Lab is
in order, maybe just one per testing site... Wouldn't
two be fun.
Ok - Back to my pitiful at-home suffering...
Truly - the program needs a means of improvement and
these ideas or some like them should be considered by
the CCIE Program Administrators.
Kathe, Jeff, or Maurito, you guys hearing us down
here?
===================
There's another thread now about a guy who got banned
from the entire Cisco Certification Program for having
notes in the lab. This means permanent ban.
Apparently, the person did not think the notes were
his but he was confronted by a proctor on the matter,
etc.
One never knows, but I sincerely doubt a proctor will
sacrafice his or her integrity over accusing a
candidate without just cause.
This case may appear here.
So the program does have teeth.
--- Dee <dt30083@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, but who defines brute force?.. I don't think
> anyone without the funds would try bruteforce and
> not everyone passes the first time.. U pass when u r
> tired of failing IMHO
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Colin McNamara" <colin@2cups.com>
> To: "Scott Morris" <smorris@ipexpert.com>
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Sent: 10/9/07 3:57 PM
> Subject: RE: CCIE Lab Price Increase
>
> I am all for scheduling something akin to the
> assessor lab to test
> performance prior to scheduling a date. Brute force
> should only be used
> to test passwords, not get your CCIE #.
>
> --
> Colin McNamara
> (858)208-8105
> CCIE #18233
> "The difficult we do immediately, the impossible
> just takes a little longer"
>
> On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 17:31 -0400, Scott Morris
> wrote:
> > IMHO that will actually scare most people. And
> I'm sure they'll come up
> > with some difficult criteria to meet before you
> even get to that point of
> > scheduling such that there isn't a backlog like
> that.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brad Ellis [mailto:brad@ccbootcamp.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 4:46 PM
> > To: smorris@ipexpert.com; Christopher M. Heffner;
> Eric Dobyns; Brian Dennis
> > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com;
> security@groupstudy.com; comserv@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: CCIE Lab Price Increase
> >
> > Scott,
> >
> > I understood what you were referring too; ie,
> someone's readiness to take
> > the lab exam. I think the written exam should do a
> better job of reflecting
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 16 2007 - 13:11:13 ART