Re: Not a happy ending ... I came up short.

Hi Andrew,

  Really sorry to hear that but I wish all the best for your next attempt
...You have the great attitude and so never give up ...The post you did is
awesome but I could feel your pain when you tried not express your pain
........

Once again please come back to track as soon as possible and wish you all
the best for the next attempt

Regards
Anantha Subramanian Natarajan

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:00 AM, peter morgan <cciemaha_at_yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi "ALL From_NJ",
>
> Thanks for the resourceful post! I wish you to pass in the very next
> attempt!
>
> Anyway I think that, this "Core" is a myth with V4 Labs. The exam has three
> different sections. Each of the three is mandatory to pass.Three sections
> can be from different technology areas. In V3 labs we were calling that FR,
> Switching & IGP as the core section. Which means if you pass the core then
> you can have majority of marks(Around 60%) & core technology ares are
> mandatory to configure correctly. For example if u do not configure IGP
> correctly you may loose marks of Security section. Even you enter correct
> security commands your packets may not pass to test your configuration
> becuase of an IGP issue. Then you loose your security marks even with
> correct configurations. So, this core was a pre-requirement to have rest of
> the marks(Around 40%). In my exams I had a personal guide line that; I have
> to have configured & tested Core before the lunch time of the exam.
>
> If we specifically discuss about V4 configuration section then there may be
> Core technology areas which may be dependant factors for other technology
> area configurations. Eg: MPLS may be a new addition to configuration core...
>
> HTH,
>
> PM
> CCIE#18807
>
>
> --- On Thu, 10/29/09, ALL From_NJ <all.from.nj_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: ALL From_NJ <all.from.nj_at_gmail.com>
> > Subject: Not a happy ending ... I came up short.
> > To: "Cisco certification" <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> > Date: Thursday, October 29, 2009, 9:13 PM
> > Hey team,
> >
> > I was hoping for a better post ... Yesterday I took the lab
> > and failed.
> > Some thoughts and comments, and hopefully you all will find
> > these helpful.
> > Sorry for the long post.
> >
> > *** OEQs - passed this part.
> >
> > - I found these to be fairly interesting. 3 were
> > pretty easy and 1 was a
> > bit hard IMO. The hard one really belonged to another
> > CCIE track, and not
> > the R&S ... I gave it my best guess, but since I was
> > not studying for this
> > technology, I am not sure of the answer. I suppose
> > that one could argue
> > that I should be aware of this hard question ..., and I was
> > a little bit,
> > but I certainly was not studying for it.
> >
> > - From my experience with the OEQs, I found these to fall
> > in line with many
> > of my lab testing and feature testing I had done in my
> > preparation. If you
> > like to test a protocol and verify your work, then you will
> > have no problems
> > with the questions I had. Simple memorization would
> > have been hard to do.
> > Example of what I mean (this was not on my lab and this is
> > only an example
> > of what I mean)
> >
> > Example: lets say that you are studying trunking and you
> > want to practice
> > configuring one side and not the other. Looking at
> > the config options with
> > the trunk protocols and port modes, what would happen if
> > you only configured
> > one side? What happens if you misconfigured one
> > side? What happens if you
> > have misconfigured duplex and speeds?
> >
> > In my case, I have learned a lot by using debugs and
> > misconfiguring things.
> > You all know that when things do not go right, you will
> > learn a lot. It is
> > easy to forget the labs you did when everything worked.
> >
> > So to continue following this example - if you were asked
> > about a trunking
> > config or about a trunk operation for a OEQ, you would
> > probably get this
> > question and think it was easy.
> >
> > For the 3 'easy' questions I had, I found that my normal
> > study habits
> > covered these nicely.
> >
> > I do wish Cisco would get rid of these OEQs all together
> > however, they are
> > not worth the time IMO, and do not really ensure
> > 'only-experts' pass. A lot
> > of 'hit-or-miss' in these questions and my feelings are
> > that some experts
> > have failed the lab because of these, and I think these
> > people should have
> > passed. Any who ...
> >
> > *** Troubleshooting section - I failed this section since I
> > had not
> > completed enough tickets in the time given.
> >
> > It was very disheartening that before lunch I knew my whole
> > trip was a
> > failure. I simply had not completed enough tickets
> > given the time.
> >
> > Most of these were similar to what I have labbed, however,
> > a few of these
> > were odd IMO and I did not even think of these for an
> > R&S / enterprise type
> > ...
> >
> > The wording of the problem is purposely vague, and the
> > router access was
> > clumsy. I think the screen could be partitioned and
> > presented in a much
> > more clear way. It is very easy to look at the
> > diagram and get lost and or
> > confused. I got the feeling that Cisco is trying to
> > do too much with one
> > screen, and i would suggest that the screen be broken up
> > some /
> > partitioned.
> >
> > Overall, I liked the idea of having a troubleshooting
> > section ...
> >
> > Putting the confusion and wording aside, you have to study
> > very hard for
> > this section. I figured since I have done a fair
> > amount of tshooting in the
> > past and in my studies, that I would find this section an
> > easy addition. I
> > also consider myself decent with the core technologies and
> > some of the new
> > 'non-core' lab items, so I was looking forward to this.
> >
> > My approach does not work. One reason this does not
> > work is because the
> > questions are so vague. An example that was
> > previously shown by Cisco was
> > "router X cannot communicate with router Y". How to
> > troubleshoot this
> > quickly? There are a few routers and or a frame relay
> > network in the middle
> > of the two end points ...
> >
> > Lets say you start with a ping and the ping fails, ok ...
> > you verified that
> > the trouble ticket are real trouble tickets. Ping
> > does not get you much in
> > this environment ... so is the problem an IP address
> > misconfigured on the
> > end point routers or a router in the middle, an interface
> > shutdown, a
> > routing protocol configured wrong, etc ... how to start and
> > find this
> > quickly?
> >
> > If you have 12 tickets in total, and you need to pass this
> > section, then
> > you need to solve about 9 or so ... Try to solve them all
> > ... make sure you
> > have some 'padding' in case one of your other solutions is
> > not the right
> > one. My advice would be to solve as many as you can.
> >
> > You have about 11 to 13 minutes per question. I found
> > this section hard ...
> > and did not pass this section.
> >
> > I wish the troubleshooting section could be included in the
> > regular lab.
> > This way you would solve the tickets as well as build your
> > lab at the same
> > time. Any who ...
> >
> > *** Configure section - I failed this part as well.
> >
> > I agree with what others have said. You have around
> > 5.5 hours and an
> > enormous amount of information to get through. It
> > seems like they have
> > taken a normal lab and just reorganized it and now give you
> > less time to
> > solve it.
> >
> > Please forgive me for suggesting this, but ... in order to
> > pass the config
> > section, I almost feel as though you need to memorize
> > commands and spit out
> > the configs quickly. No time for doc cd, and limited
> > time for the '?'. I
> > think it is a terrible idea to blindly memorize materials
> > ... but I cannot
> > think of another way to answer a huge amount of material in
> > just a little
> > over 5 hours.
> >
> > Does this mean that being a CCIE requires you to have an
> > amazing memory? I
> > hate to say it, but I think Cisco is missing it on
> > this. I do not think
> > this format allows for a lot of individual creativity and
> > style ... I think
> > you will have to fit whatever mold is required.
> > Perhaps that is a good
> > thing anyway, maybe ... I just think that the config
> > section will force
> > people to memorize technologies. I would like to see
> > differences in people
> > and also still allow for different approaches and styles.
> >
> > Sorry team, I know I am not communicating this very well,
> > and in fact I do
> > not like the way this sounds.
> >
> > If I am to plan my next take, I will make sure that I can
> > spit out the
> > "non-core" commands quickly, as well as the 'extraneous'
> > and obscure tweaks
> > to each of these non-core topics ... I would need to do
> > this super fast
> > since time is so tight. We used to have the doc cd
> > for these obscure items
> > ... maybe you can still rely on the doc cd, and you should
> > know how to find
> > everything super quick.
> >
> > What is core and non-core? <-- ... IMO, this has
> > not been communicated
> > properly yet ...
> >
> > I think that my lab was really more of a network admin lab,
> > and less like a
> > 'set up an advanced and insane network'. What does
> > this mean in terms of
> > lab topics? Well ... look at the lab blueprint, and
> > think about which items
> > are 'on-going' and admin work. Study the heck out of
> > these ...
> >
> > My lab had some new topics on it, of course it was the new
> > version; makes
> > sense ... Lord knows I do not want to break the NDA here
> > ... so I am trying
> > to tip toe this topic carefully ...
> >
> > Let me just say, it is my opinion that you cannot pass
> > without knowing the
> > non-core topics. Does this make sense? Probably
> > not ... what I think has
> > happened is that the lab has shifted its
> > core. From what used to be
> > advanced network set up, R&S, ... to more of a network
> > admin role. This is
> > also what Cisco has told us.
> >
> > Folks - think back to what Maurilio has told us and the
> > extensive research
> > that Cisco did when re-designing the R&S CCIE.
> > Cisco found out that
> > companies are not looking for network set up, but more of
> > an ongoing
> > maintenance, monitoring, troubleshooting, etc ...
> >
> > So this means less focus on what we used to think was core;
> > folks, I cannot
> > emphasize this enough. I was very disappointed to
> > find that what I had
> > previously considered to be the traditional R&S core
> > topics are not really
> > core anymore ... in fact, my studies were off. Cisco
> > told us that the
> > version 4 lab had changed its focus ... I guess I did not
> > fully understand
> > what this means in terms of prep work.
> >
> > Team - as mentioned above, look over the blueprint again
> > and consider those
> > items which represent this change in focus and study the
> > heck out of them.
> > (the non-core is now core topics). Of course you have
> > to know the "core R&S
> > topics" ... but you will not pass without knowing the "new
> > v4 core" (AKA
> > non-core).
> >
> > Back to the earlier question ... what is core and
> > non-core? Another way of
> > looking at this question is ... "can I pass without knowing
> > the non-core
> > topics?" As others have mentioned in their v4
> > reviews, everything on the
> > blueprint is fair game. Ok ... we already knew this,
> > and team, I hope this
> > is becoming clearer.
> >
> > Do not make the same mistake as me and think that the
> > R&S is a routing is
> > switching lab ... the focus has changed some as Cisco told
> > us. I hope this
> > message is getting out.
> >
> > 'nough said about that.
> >
> > A little about my prep work. I have used the ASET
> > labs, and these are
> > great. These helped me a lot in the CCIE v3
> > topics. I was able to get
> > through many of these in 6 hours or so ... and get
> > 90%+ in scores. I
> > thought I was ready for the CCIE lab and everything seemed
> > to be on target
> > for my lab! As mentioned above however, I did not
> > fully understand the
> > change in focus and how the non-core items have become
> > core. I also used
> > CCBOOTCAMPs v3 materials, and I enjoyed these a lot.
> > I was completing these
> > fairly well in my studies.
> >
> > I am sorry to be so confusing in my writing. I hope
> > what I have said makes
> > sense. Please also go back and re-read what Cisco has
> > told us about the new
> > v4 design and new topics.
> >
> > Also team, I hope to avoid a word smith exercise with any
> > of you about
> > what the word core means. I am sure that this word
> > has many meanings to
> > many people.
> >
> > It is getting late and I am sure my ramblings have become
> > long winded
> > please permit a few more (then I promise to be done with
> > this email)
> >
> > A suggestion to the vendors who are on this list. I
> > might suggest to take
> > an 8 hour lab and fit it into a 5.5 hour time frame.
> > Please also consider
> > the change in focus that Cisco told us about and ensure
> > that there are
> > plenty of additional items in the labs you create.
> > Remove some of the
> > routing and switching portions and make sure you include
> > extraneous and
> > obscure non-core topics. We have to be an expert in
> > everything of course
> >
> > You all are very sharp, all of you, and so I am probably
> > not telling you
> > anything you do not already know. Rock on
> > vendors!
> >
> > For the Cisco partners, the change in focus is good for
> > enterprise customers
> > who need more of a network admin focus / role and
> > does this fit your
> > business model? What do Cisco partners want in a
> > CCIE? Is this
> > represented in the new v4 format? If not, I would
> > suggest to voice your
> > comments as it is important to both partners and enterprise
> > customers. Very
> > important to voice your comments / praise /
> > concerns. Just a thought .
> >
> > Team pardon the delays in my next responses.
> > After having put many things
> > on hold, I have an immediate honey-do list to take care
> > of. I have some
> > work to do around the house before I can consider how I
> > will take this on
> > again oh boy, it is fall in NJ and so I have
> > mountains of leaves to attend
> > to. My aching back!
> >
> > Lol have a great night team.
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Lee Lissitz
> > all.from.nj_at_gmail.com
> >
> >
> > 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
Received on Fri Oct 30 2009 - 05:09:45 ART