Re: Failed Again!!!

No doubt narbik , groupstudy is the best out there and will continue
to be , it also helped me immensely for my lab , its just that it
has been a little of non-technical stuff flying around lately IMHO.

On 9/9/09, Narbik Kocharians <narbikk_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> You know guys i totally respect whats been said about OEQs, but one thing i
> will NOT agree with is putting down Group Study, I believe its simply the
> BEST and there is no other forum like it in the world. There are vendors
> that tried to kill GS just to promote their own business, some even made a
> Class On demand to route students to their forum, and they all failed. But
> the truth of the matter is that it has helped LOTS of VENDORS get their
> business started and LOTS of vendors to stay in business and LOTS of
> students get their motivation back and LOTS of people like YOURSELF study
> and pass their CCIE.
> Remember and just think about it for a second..........The owner does not
> make a penny out of this.
>
> So let's stop this nonsense about bad mouthing GS. If you think its bad
> PLEASE show me another forum of the same caliber. You don't know the amount
> of effort that goes behind the scenes to make this thing happen.
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 4:22 PM, peter ehiwe
> <ccie.in.nigeria_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> lol , its just that groupstudy feels like facebook this days
>>
>> On 9/8/09, Mohamed El Henawy <m.henawy_at_link.net> wrote:
>> > 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
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________________________________
>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Warm Regards
>> Peter.
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Narbik Kocharians
> CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security)
> www.MicronicsTraining.com
> Sr. Technical Instructor
>

-- 
Warm Regards
Peter.
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net