From: Peter Van Oene (petvan@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Mar 10 2008 - 15:24:57 ARST
Just a general point here Ed.
The CCIE exam is a test. It has questions, with point weightings, and a set
of acceptable answers for those questions. If you are configuring something
that doesn't directly have points attached to it, nor is specifically asked
for in the question, a) you are wasting your time, and b) you might take
away from points you'd otherwise recieve.
When you see a question, look at its point weighting, and consider your
candidate answers. The answer should equate well with the points given it.
If a 2 point question requires 20 minutes of work, touching 4 boxes with 10
lines of code, you probably aren't reading it right, just like you wouldn't
write a 10 paragraph answer to a 2 point question on an exam.
Keep things in perspective.
Pete
On 3/6/08, Adel Karim <adelkarim@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And this is one of the greatest things behind Mock labs, is that you get
> to
> learn a new thing with every lab.
>
> If you think positively in every failure, you will definitely make it.
> This
> could be as simple as saying: I didn't make it but I have learned new
> topics
> that I have to stress on. This is better than learning about this new
> topic
> in the actual exam...
>
> Don't lose hope because of failing a Mock lab, move on towards the real
> one
> and learn from your mistakes.
>
> Adel
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 7:59 AM, Ed Lui <edwlui@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Scott,
> >
> > Very good point.
> >
> > I learn something new every second.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Lui
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Scott Vermillion" <scott_ccie_list@it-ag.com>
> > To: "'Ed Lui'" <edwlui@gmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 8:55 PM
> > Subject: RE: Lab exam SUCCEED or FAILED
> >
> >
> > > Hi Lui,
> > >
> > > I understand. And I also understand much if not all of your
> > frustration.
> > > Regarding such things as conflicts between the drawing and the
> workbook,
> > > and
> > > then later even taking away points for where hellos are or are not
> > > generated
> > > from, this is, IMHO, beyond silly. Given that the real lab involves
> no
> > > detailed grading report, could anyone ever reasonably be expected to
> > pass
> > > were the grading to be that brutal and that random? Likely not. So
> > don't
> > > stress over it. Accept that the true lesson is that sometimes
> mistakes
> > in
> > > one block of points cascades into other blocks of points. Conceivably
> > you
> > > could lose a sufficient number of points to fail with one serious
> > misstep.
> > > That is the lesson. Also take comfort in knowing that, unlike these
> > > online
> > > things, you have a proctor to pester in the $1400 version of the lab.
> > ;~)
> > > Certainly you noticed these inconsistencies and you would have sought
> > > clarification if you could have (I know I did). Not having that
> ability
> > > is
> > > a shortcoming of the online format, but not really a damning one,
> IMHO.
> > > Again, take it for what it's worth. Nothing more, nothing less. And
> > try
> > > to
> > > get some feedback from your vendor if you're really hung up over
> > > something.
> > > I personally resisted all temptation to try to engage them regarding
> any
> > > of
> > > these specifics, much as I may have wanted to at times. I
> internalized
> > > what
> > > I could and flatly rejected the rest. Still passed. May never have
> > > gotten
> > > an Assessor IE nor an IE IE, but I did get the one that counts for
> > > something
> > > at the end of it all...
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> > Ed
> > > Lui
> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:40 PM
> > > To: Scott Vermillion; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: Re: Lab exam SUCCEED or FAILED
> > >
> > > Scott,
> > >
> > > I appreciate your feedback. I am just trying to figure what should I
> > learn
> > > from the experience. Did I learn something right or just ignore it.
> That
> > > really affects my learning path.
> > >
> > > You can assume it is a certain vendor's product. But I am not going to
> > > tell
> > > who it was. :-)
> > >
> > > However, I appreciate all of your feedback deep from my heart.
> > >
> > > Lui
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Scott Vermillion" <scott_ccie_list@it-ag.com>
> > > To: "'Ed Lui'" <edwlui@gmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:21 PM
> > > Subject: RE: Lab exam SUCCEED or FAILED
> > >
> > >
> > >> Lui,
> > >>
> > >> I did not read your entire e-mail, but enough to know that you've
> > posted
> > >> highly detailed information regarding a tool that people use to judge
> > >> their
> > >> own readiness for the real lab. In doing so, you reduce the value of
> > the
> > >> tool for everyone that comes after you. Ask general questions of the
> > >> group,
> > >> but keep the specifics between you and IE. I too took exception to
> > some
> > >> of
> > >> the grading (and in glancing over things, likely because of some of
> the
> > >> exact same issues). However, my philosophy settled as follows:
> > >>
> > >> 1. I gain nothing from getting IE to award me 80 or greater points.
> > >> There
> > >> is no IE IE. There is no Assessor IE. There is only the CCIE IE that
> > >> comes
> > >> with a number.
> > >>
> > >> 2. I learn from every occasion that they mark me down, whether I
> agree
> > >> with
> > >> it or not. Frankly, in some cases, it seemed as though a real
> stretch
> > >> was
> > >> being made to mark me down (sometimes even I lost points when what I
> > >> "failed" to accommodate in my config was also absent from the
> solutions
> > >> guide itself for crying out loud!!).
> > >>
> > >> But please do not post these highly detailed tasks, solutions, and
> > >> grading
> > >> details publicly. Others are paying hard-earned money to go through
> > this
> > >> same process, which is compromised if the particulars are known in
> > >> advance!
> > >>
> > >> Scott
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> > >> Ed
> > >> Lui
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:24 PM
> > >> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > >> Subject: Lab exam SUCCEED or FAILED
> > >>
> > >> Hi Group,
> > >>
> > >> I have done a few Mock Labs to prepare my 1st $1400 rack rental in
> San
> > >> Jose
> > >> early April. And I just recieved the report for my mock lab
> yesterday.
> > I
> > >> have
> > >> some questions really need your help.
> > >>
> > >> 1. I heard that the general rule in the lab is full ip reachability.
> > So
> > >> if
> > >> only some routers in the lab are running BGP. And I did not bring
> > routes
> > >> advertised by BGP routers and/or BB routers or maybe I did not
> > >> redistribute
> > >> a
> > >> loopback interface which is not included in any routing prortocol. Am
> I
> > >> automatically failed the lab even I get 80% or over? Or it is not
> > >> possible
> > >> to
> > >> get 80% or more?
> > >>
> > >> 2. I would like some clarification on tasks I lost points in the
> mock
> > >> lab.
> > >> I
> > >> would really appreciate your input. The question says:
> > >>
> > >> . Network administrators of R6 have been noticing output drops
> > >> accumulating
> > >> on
> > >> the Frame Relay link to BBI. In order to prevent this
> > >> type of tail drop configure R6 to randomly drop packets before
> > >> congestion
> > >> happens on the Serial interface's output queue.
> > >> . In order to ensure that critical traffic transiting your network
> gets
> > >> the
> > >> best service possible configure R6 so that critical traffic will not
> be
> > >> dropped unless there are 50 packets in the output queue.
> > >> . If there are 70 critical packets in the output queue R6 should
> > randomly
> > >> drop
> > >> 2 out of every 16 of these packets.
> > >> . In the case that there are more than 70 critical packets in the
> > output
> > >> queue, they should all be dropped.
> > >>
> > >> My answer to the task is :
> > >>
> > >> interface Serial0/0
> > >> ip address 54.9.1.6 255.255.255.0
> > >> encapsulation frame-relay
> > >> ip summary-address rip 129.9.0.0 255.255.128.0
> > >> random-detect
> > >> random-detect precedence 5 50 70 8
> > >> random-detect precedence 6 50 70 8 <------------------- EXTRA CONFIG
> > >> random-detect precedence 7 50 70 8 <------------------- EXTRA CONFIG
> > >> frame-relay map ip 54.9.1.254 101 broadcast
> > >> no frame-relay inverse-arp
> > >> My question is : Do I get points for this question with the extra
> lines
> > >> of
> > >> config indicated?
> > >>
> > >> 3. Task says:
> > >>
> > >> . Configure SWI and SW4 in such a way that R5 E0/0 and SW2 Fa0/20
> > appear
> > >> directly connected via CDP.
> > >> . If an additional VLAN is needed use VLAN 100.
> > >> Layer 1 connection: R5(e0/0)====SW1====SW4=====(Fa0/20)SW2
> > >>
> > >> "Diagram here http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgsxsjvv_44htgh39dp"
> > >>
> > >> I successfully configured a layer 2 tunnel. So that R5 and SW2 see
> each
> > >> other
> > >> as neighbor according to CDP.
> > >>
> > >> Now, SW2 was pre-congifured with the ip address on interface vlan 58.
> I
> > >> was
> > >> trying to put the ip address on the Fa0/20 of SW2. SW2 complained
> about
> > >> duplicate ip address. I then I looked the lab rule as shown below:
> > >>
> > >> Lab Do's and Don'ts:
> > >> . Do not change or add any IP addresses from the initial
> configuration
> > >> unless
> > >> otherwise specified
> > >> . Do not change any interface encapsulations unless otherwise
> specified
> > >> . Do not change the console, AUX or VTY passwords or access methods
> > >> unless
> > >> otherwise specified
> > >> . Do not use any static routes, default routes, default networks, or
> > >> policy
> > >> routing unless otherwise specified
> > >> . Save your configurations often
> > >>
> > >> However, I lost points on this task because "IP address should've
> been
> > >> configured on SW2's Fa0/20 interface as per diagram, not on Vlan58"
> > >>
> > >> Is it a fair game? Did I miss something. Due to points lost on this
> > task,
> > >> I
> > >> also lost points on other task relied on this task. The reason is
> > "EIGRP
> > >> hellos should've been sent out SW2's Fa0/20 interface, not Vlan58"
> > >>
> > >> Please help,
> > >>
> > >> Lui
> > >>
> > >>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > >> 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
> Adel Karim Mansour
> CCIE# 20147 R&S
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 07:53:53 ART