Re: Failed Again!!!

storm-control open-ended level zero :)...plz

or else

storm-control action shutdown

----- Original Message -----
From: "wdf wefwe" <fordownloadsccie_at_gmail.com>
To: "Josh Fleishman" <josh.fleishman_at_gmail.com>
Cc: "Rick Tyrell" <rtyrell_at_gmail.com>; "Alexei Monastyrnyi"
<alexeim73_at_gmail.com>; "Dennis Worth" <dennis.worth_at_gmail.com>;
<ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 2:01 AM
Subject: Re: Failed Again!!!

> No offence josh , but i dont think your comments on d credibility of
> ccie's above 24000 is fair , if the questions are easy then you should
> get them correctly shouldnt you , i guess you should have passed the
> OEQ.
>
> i believe if your understanding of the theory behind the technology is
> core or rock solid then you shouldnt fail the OEQ , trust me i know
> wat im saying cos ive seen the questions and conquered.
>
> "Remember there is nothing as practical as a good theory"
>
> To those that feel they need to study a bank of questions to pass the
> OEQ , i think you might be disappointed IMHO , all you need is to
> devour the books and study a lot of documentation and practise a lot
> on the racks to get a very deep understanding of the technology.
>
> Regards ,
>
> CCNAx3(Security , Voice , Wireless)
>
>
>
>
> On 9/8/09, Josh Fleishman <josh.fleishman_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I totally agree. Having had a similar experience of
>> passing the lab but not the OEQs, I'm not inclined to taking it again
>> until
>> the OEQs are gone.
>>
>> Also, considering that (based on my experience) the lab portion is
>> actually
>> a lot easier now than it was before the OEQs were added, I personnally do
>> not look at someone with a CCIE in the 24000+ range as having
>> accomplished
>> nearly as much as those with numbers below 24000. 21% of their
>> accomplishment is based on them being able to answer 3 out of 4 'easy'
>> questions. Not exactly a testament to their expertise IMO. Those who
>> pass
>> should feel a little cheated too.
>>
>> -Josh
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Rick Tyrell <rtyrell_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I failed for the 3rd time on August 17th. I haven't felt like writing
>>> anything until I read this post. I failed the OEQ section, even though
>>> I
>>> had passed it the last time. So I guess I went from being 100% on Core
>>> Knowledge to 0% even though I sat another bootcamp and was able to
>>> dedicate
>>> the final 6 weeks of preparation without having to be at work. I
>>> covered
>>> my
>>> weak areas. But I can not memorize every Cisco Press book verbatim
>>> which
>>> is
>>> what the OEQ seems to have become.
>>>
>>> Now I understand that Cisco is trying to weed out people who cheat. But
>>> they are doing it the wrong way. Don't waste someones money and time
>>> having
>>> them fly out to a CCIE Lab locations and fail them on the OEQ section.
>>> Make
>>> it a separate exam that can be taken remotely or at a local Cisco
>>> office. Once they can pass the OEQ then they can be allowed to take the
>>> Lab
>>> exam. Interview me in person at a Cisco office and see if I am a
>>> cheater
>>> or
>>> not. It doesn't take long to find out if someone really knows their
>>> stuff,
>>> just talk to them face to face for a few minutes. I have worked closely
>>> with Cisco SEs and spent many hours on the phone with TAC
>>> troubleshooting
>>> problems they have never seen. Even teaching them a few things in
>>> coming
>>> up
>>> with solutions!
>>>
>>> I also went throughout the CCNA, CCNP, and CCSP. I remember failing the
>>> Troubleshooting and Support exam for the CCNP twice before finally
>>> passing
>>> it, almost giving up. I also have over 10 years of building and
>>> troubleshooting complex networks. If Cisco is really considering the
>>> "Cisco
>>> Certified Architect" methodology maybe they should look at what a
>>> candidate
>>> has gone through before taking the CCIE exam. If I was cheating do you
>>> think I would have gone through the time and money it took going through
>>> the
>>> foundational certifications and spending countless hours in training?
>>>
>>> Maybe instead of an OEQ section we could write and essay about how we
>>> love
>>> Cisco and will never user another companies products...LOL. I could
>>> write
>>> in there how I convinced my company to switch from 3COM to Cisco and
>>> have
>>> blanketed our entire Campus with their equipment and Smartnet contracts.
>>> This was all done by me, not a CCIE or "Cisco Certified Architect" or
>>> Cisco
>>> SE. I mean that is what they are trying to produce right? Someone who
>>> knows the technology, can sell the technology to the CIO, configure and
>>> troubleshoot it, draw up some pretty Visio diagrams, and upgrade to the
>>> newest model every few years. I have been doing all this for the last
>>> 10
>>> years :)
>>>
>>> I will learn the 4.0 material because it is relevant to current industry
>>> standards We are getting ready to implement MPLS VPNs where I work.
>>> But
>>> I
>>> will not be taking the CCIE 4.0 R&S Lab unless Cisco removes the OEQ
>>> section, if I decide to take it at all. I do feel the troubleshooting
>>> section is a step in the right direction. This exam should
>>> be testing candidates on real world topologies and situations. I have
>>> always had respect for Cisco and their certification program. But I'm
>>> done
>>> with pissing my money and time down the toilet.
>>>
>>>
>>> -Rick
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Alexei Monastyrnyi <alexeim73_at_gmail.com
>>> >wrote:
>>>
>>> > Sorry to hear that, mate. 5th try was my lucky one, so you might pass
>>> > on
>>> > that one as well. Just keep up high spirits.
>>> >
>>> > A. #17234 (RS)
>>> >
>>> > Dennis Worth wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> FYI Group
>>> >> Failed CCIE R&S for the 4th time, and this time it was because of the
>>> >> OEQ's.
>>> >> I am so glad Cisco wants to stop the cheaters out there, but after 5
>>> years
>>> >> on and off of going through this stuff to pass this lab, failing on 1
>>> >> simple
>>> >> question that is not EXACTLY what they are asking for is absolutely
>>> >> out
>>> of
>>> >> control.
>>> >>
>>> >> I will be back, but to all who take this lab exam, you might as well
>>> chalk
>>> >> it up to LUCK more than skill or knowledge. I hate what this exam has
>>> come
>>> >> to. It really has no relevance to anything with those questions.
>>> >>
>>> >> Best of LUCK to anyone who takes the lab, because you will need it!
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________________________________
>>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.83/2353 - Release Date: 09/08/09
06:48:00

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Wed Sep 09 2009 - 01:15:31 ART