From: Michael Stewart (mstewart350@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Dec 23 2007 - 01:26:39 ART
Thank you all for the input...
I am about a month away from my exam (1/24), and feeling good about my
readiness. I only had to reference the DocCD on a NAT task, and I didn't
have any other wrong answers except for the QoS task.. I finished in 3:30,
but I definitely felt unorganized and unsure of my progress relative to
time. I did read the entire thing twice, and completed my diagrams in about
45 minutes. It took about 30 min for L2/FR and 60 minutes for IGP. I was
only 50% competed at this point, and over 2 hours into it. BGP, IOS, QoS,
and MCast took the remainder 1:45, but I was worried because I was imanle
to gauge that.
Brian,
I will be in your bootcamp 1/7/08. I have scheduled my 2nd Assessor 1/19,
and some NMC Check-Its on 12/29, 1/5, and 1/20. I am excited to see the
before and after results, and hope my interpretation, organizational skill,
and "progress meter" get where they need to be.
Thanks again!
Michael
PS: I found out from weather.com it averages 44H-22L degrees F during the
bootcamp...WOW! You need to come down to So. FL to hold some of of these
Winter Camps! Tonight's low: 72F.
Happy Holidays, all!
On Dec 22, 2007 8:58 PM, Scott Morris <smorris@ipexpert.com> wrote:
> The assessor is a hands-off grading. So there may be
> discrepancies/problems
> with the script.
>
> No matter how close you are, the real exam is hands-on grading. Yup,
> there's a script. But there's always a live proctor as well to look at
> things. Obviously, the closer you are the more time will be spent
> manually
> on things!
>
> The real labs go through a much more extensive testing
> procedure/grading/reviewing before being rolled out to the real world.
> Assessor, well... it's a test, but IMHO not held to the same extensive
> reviews because it's just... well.... different.
>
> The real exam is a results-based exam, so they may find things by "show ip
> bgp" on the receiving router unless there was somehting else in the
> instructions that told you to do, or not to do something else.
>
> HTH,
>
>
> Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
> JNCIE-M
> #153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al.
> CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-ER
> 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
> Michael Stewart
> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 4:53 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Cisco Assessor Help
>
> Hello Experts,
>
> I took my first Cisco Assessor Lab this morning, and am pretty excited
> about
> the results! It is a good eye-opener on how tasks are graded, and how
> points
> are assigned.
>
> I did have one issue with a solution regarding BGP and next-hop-self.
> Instead of using this on a neighbor command, I just inserted a "set ip
> next-hop peer-address" into the route-map which was needed for another
> task
> (dealing with setting MED out to this same neighbor). The only constraint
> on
> the task was to accomplish this by not re-configuring any other router.
>
> My question is whether or not this would get marked wrong in the real lab
> also...?
> During my studying with vendor WBs, I would always assume if you get the
> same results, the solution is ok. Now my eyes are opened to the fact that
> scripts do not always check every answer!
>
> I think I read/heard that if you are within a certain range of 80% (3 pts
> or
> so), your lab gets manually checked... is that correct? If so, what
> happens
> if there are 2 or 3 task solutions which the script does not account for,
> and you get pushed out of this range. I assume you pay the re-grade if you
> feel like you really did enough to pass!
>
>
> A follow-up question to the group is to whether or not my answer, is
> indeed,
> correct?
>
> Here is the answer per the Assessor:
>
> router bgp 1
> *neighbor 100.1.65.6 next-hop-self
> * no synchronization
> bgp log-neighbor-changes
> neighbor 100.1.1.1 remote-as 1
> neighbor 100.1.1.1 update-source Loopback0 neighbor 100.1.65.6 remote-as
> 2
> neighbor 100.1.65.6 route-map TO_R6 out no auto-summary !
> !
> !
> route-map TO_R6 permit 10
> set metric 500
> !
>
>
>
> Here is my answer:
>
> router bgp 1
> no synchronization
> bgp log-neighbor-changes
> neighbor 100.1.1.1 remote-as 1
> neighbor 100.1.1.1 update-source Loopback0 neighbor 100.1.65.6 remote-as
> 2
> neighbor 100.1.65.6 route-map TO_R6 out no auto-summary !
> !
> !
> route-map TO_R6 permit 10
> set metric 500
> set ip next-hop peer-address
>
>
> Any/all input is welcome!
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 01 2008 - 12:04:31 ARST