From: Charles Henson (chenson@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Oct 20 2008 - 22:08:12 ARST
That's good stuff Lloyd. Exactly what I was looking for. Thanks for the
input!
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Lloyd Ardoin <lloyd@thewizkid.biz> wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> I too was a 'top down' guy and that is definitely not the best approach. I
> have attempted the lab a few times now and I can honestly tell you that
> would not be my recommendation. Not sure if you have access to IE's web site
> and material but Brian Dennis does a good webinar on lab strategy. The lab
> material may or may not be in any specific order. Just to give you a very
> specific example or two. For example you could be asked to configure vlans
> on the switches and do some type of tweaking to spanning-tree but a few
> sections over you may be asked to set up MSTP so if you don't read ahead you
> will have to redo your work. Another example I ran into on a WB lab is where
> they ask you to set up frame relay hub and spoke scenario but then later in
> the IGP (EIGRP) section they want you to use authentication using key chains
> and have the hub use different keys with each spoke which can only be done
> with virtual-templates interfaces (PPPoFR) so now you have to redo all the
> interfaces because you didn't read ahead. This was really hard for me to
> because like you I like top down. I have heard some people suggest that they
> do only the tasks initially that will get them IGP reachability that 'golden
> moment' so to speak and then they go back and do the STP tweaking,
> authentication, etc. IE suggests reading the lab all the way though, as does
> Cisco by the way and making a column list of each task with a task number,
> points column and a notes column. Use this to keep track of your
> accomplishments. I personally think this is good advice. Based on my
> experience so far I believe you have to be able to complete the 'core'
> technologies in the first 3 - 4 hours successfully (that means correctly!)
> to pass the lab. The other thing that I have been weak on is verification.
> When you complete a task how do you verify it's correctness? If you read the
> comments on Cisco's web site about the LAB they are very specific about that
> during the lab exam. You should verify as you complete each task no matter
> how significant or insignificant you think it may be. My other suggestion
> is to do a good layer 3 drawing that you can rely on to spot potential
> problems like split horizen, routing loops, a need to use a virtual-link if
> you happen to get OSPF and have a situation that requires it, etc. May
> sound silly but I think you should practice doing those drawings and get
> very comfortable with doing that. Another issue I have is skim reading which
> can cause a problem with misinterpretation or missing a key word that may be
> significant. I do a lot of reading and have a tendency to do that and during
> the lab a single word can make a difference in interpretation. Some have
> suggested using your finger to point to each word as you read the question
> which may help to slow you down and give pause to the meaning of the task.
> And not to sound trite but from the NMC group they will say "make no
> assumptions, know all your options". Sounds simple enough but it really
> isn't. We get used to configuring a solution one or two ways and we are not
> aware of another way to resolve it which makes us vulnerable to a miss-step
> and the solution that they are looking for! In my work I interact with two
> AT&T engineers on a fairly consistent basis and they are both incredibly
> intelligent and understand the technologies very well and I know that one of
> them has attempted the lab 3 times and not passed so strategy and
> organization can play a very significant role in your lab attempt.
>
> HTH,
> Lloyd
>
> On Oct 20, 2008, at 5:56 PM, Charles Henson wrote:
>
> I'm about a month out from my first attempt. I am at the point where I'm
>> completing most labs comfortably but I still am trying to work on
>> improving
>> my time. My question is this: One area I'm not too great on is identifying
>> the issues ahead of time. I tend to drag my feet thru the lab and when I
>> get
>> to something that influences how I set things up an hour ago, I work thru
>> it
>> and keep going. I understand that it's not effecient, that's just my
>> method.
>> Page 1, Page 2, etc. I'm just curious to hear from other people if they
>> have
>> had this approach and survived or if the key to passing in a timely manner
>> really depends on your ability to forecast problems when you initially
>> read
>> thru your instructions first thing in the morning. My goal for the next
>> month - "Strategery"
>>
>> Anyone have any thoughts? Experiences?
>>
>> --
>> Charles
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
-- CharlesBlogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 01 2008 - 15:35:21 ARST