I have to agree with John; part of being an expert level engineer is being able to go onsite to a customer's network and decode what they've done (reading between the lines, not getting the whole truth, etc) and then put it back together according to their parms. They expect you to read their minds and do it the way they want it done, without being told exactly what they mean. I absolutely HATED the lab while I was trying to pass it - in fact, on my 4th try, I knew I passed - only to find out that I missed a smallish command (remember the media-type 10baset command on a 4000 router with dual port Ethernet? I certainly do) and that particular port was a backbone connection - so no bgp, no dlsw+ no nothing. I was furious with myself and cisco, since it was a bug in 12.0 IOS that the command was required at all - the lab, technically, was perfect and working - until the proctor switched off the cabinet and reloaded everything. Again, I see your point for sure, but I think there's a lot more being tested in the CCIE lab than just your ability to configure machines.
Just my $0.02 chris From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Monasmith Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 1:40 PM To: John Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First Failed Attempt at CCIE LAb John, I respect your response to this post, but I can't help but feel like I am being tested more on semantics then I am on technically ability. When is a customer ever going to try and "trip" me up on a configuration? I know most of the content on the exam pretty well and I have yet to pass this thing. If they tell me exactly what they want without trying to be "subtle", I feel I could kick this test in the nuts more often than not. With the scoring defiencies, semantics on questions, etc. Cisco is basically getting richer on an exam that doesn't truly measure your "expert" ability. Just my 2 cents. On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:56 AM, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This is my opinion, but typically anything like you are stating below where something would grade the "major behavior" you could also replace that statement with "basic requirements". If you can't get a gateway configured, if you can't get DHCP configured, if you can't bring CallManager services up, these are all basic things. This is an EXPERT test and if you can't get the basic things configured then you probably shouldn't pass. I'm trying not to be an ass on this, but the things specifically mentioned (an E1 gateway not being configured, DHCP not being configured) are basic functionality that someone who can pass this test should be able to do in their sleep. As far as grading beyond the basic stuff, I found that on the attempts that I failed the lab, thinking back on it the reason that I failed on at least one attempt was not because I didn't have something "working", it was because I didn't read the question close enough for the clues that told me I had to configure something a certain way (or not use a certain way). When I did pass the test, I spent almost as much time reading it as I did testing my solutions. Just keep in mind that just because something appears to be working it may not be the correct solution given the specific (and oftentimes subtle) requirements of the question. John. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Goppel Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 1:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First Failed Attempt at CCIE LAb The thing is, that the testscripts they run (as far as i`ve heard and experienced) only test some basic but major behaviour. And if the main parts are successfull, they will start grading the other parts of your lab. (as a timesaver probably) thats why they probably say, that they don`t care how you do it, as long as you can provide the result. Our problem is, that we can`t defend our grading. So if we are absolutely sure, that from the 5 questions we`ve answered 4 correctly. but the one major question was wrong, resulting in failing the testscript, which resulting in failing all 5 questions (as Cisco sees it). We well get a 0% score on the topic. where we could have an 80% score. So if you are for instance messing up something simple as DHCP, and you are not getting any phones up. but you have everything else correct configured. you will fail, simply because your built solution is not working in total. If you manage to do DHCP, but you suck at QOS, you will pass because the QOS (depending on points, and topology) will probably allow the test scripts to pass. So i think we should just take it as it comes, and aim for the majority of major parts to work. There`s nothing we can do about it. sorry Erik On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Jonathan Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have heard both versions... one that it is not dependent, and one that it is... no idea any more... Jonathan On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Devildoc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So you are saying that all of the questions in a section are inter-related > and depends on each other for full points? So if i failed one question > that's critical for the test success of the other questions, and even though > i get all other questions correctly, i still failed because i didn't get > first question correctly. Now that makes sense. And i thought they award > points based on each correct question regardless of how you answer other > questions. > > JD > > > > ________________________________ > Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 17:35:57 +0200 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First Failed Attempt at CCIE LAb > > > You can try, but you are probably wasting time. > I`ve asked the same question (because i`ve had the same issues) at > networkers in Barcelona, but no results. > The statement is, we don`t care how you do it, as long as it works, so for > instance , if you have 4 questions that can only be tested if you have an E1 > up, however you failed to set it up correctly. > And you are sure you have the 4 remaining questions correct, you will fail > all 5 questions (basterds !!!) > > It`s not fair i know, however at the moment we are stuck with this kind of > grading. > > sorry. > > erik > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Devildoc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Well, if that's the case, then i am horrified at my score. I mean my score > for the call routing section is 0%. How is that even possible? I knew that > i didn't have time to complete the test, so i spent extra time on just one > section to see how it is graded. I verified that all calls were successful > and all requirements were met. Hell... there were many questions in that > section, and i received zero point for that section? > > Does anyone know if there is a Cisco contact where one can inquire some > questions about the lab exam and its grading process? > > > JD > > > > > > ________________________________ > Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 13:44:46 -0500 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > CC: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First Failed Attempt at CCIE LAb > > > > > > Here is an excerpt from the report card. > > "Your CCIE Certification Lab exam was scored based on grading policies that > are adhered to uniformly by our proctors worldwide. Marking was based on > whether the answer you provided works. Candidates are not required to use a > set methodology in achieving a correct result. The imperative is that the > solution provided produces the outcome requested. " > > I do believe that they actually grade you correctly but again there are > chances of proctors messing up as well. > > Like Scott mentioned, I would just focus on things I can control and forget > the rest... better luck next time buddy... > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Scott Monasmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > They told me the reason why they don't hold the voice exams is because they > would take up a lot more storage (hard drives/images of 3 servers, router > configs, etc.) vs. just backing up a few config files from a router/switch > to a text file for the R&S lab. > > Sorry. > > > > > > On 4/5/08, Jonathan Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What?!?!? > > > Jonathan > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Scott Monasmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Correct. BUT not available for voice though, Jonathon. > > > > > > > > > > On 4/5/08, Jonathan Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Yeah, as I thought: > > > > > > "Reevaluation of Results > > > > > > If you are concerned your results are in error, you may request a > > > "reread" until 14 days after your lab date via an email to > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Each reread costs $250.00 USD and consists of a > > > proctor loading your configurations into a rack to recreate the test > > > and re-score the entire exam. This process may take up to three weeks > > > after receipt of payment" > > > > > > > > > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Jonathan Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > There is a rescore option... isn't there? There was for the R&S... > > > > > > > > > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Scott Monasmith > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > Devildoc, I do feel your frustration. I finished my last attempt in > a > > little > > > > > over 5 hours and spent the next 3 hours verifying my work. I walked > > out of > > > > > the exam feeling like I nailed it. However, based on my score > report, > > it > > > > > reflected a score of about 74-76 points. There were 3 sections > where > > the > > > > > score came out and I was left scratching my head thinking "how can > > this be?" > > > > > - Talk about deflating. I had plenty of time to verify everthing > and > > I felt > > > > > very good about my chances. And to this day I still have no idea > how > > I could > > > > > have missed points on those sections. > > > > > > > > > > To me, there are 2 things we can do: > > > > > 1. study harder > > > > > 2. after each failed attempt, continue to stress to cisco (via the > > critique > > > > > in your score report) that a re-score option needs to be > established > > for the > > > > > exam. > > > > > > > > > > If I'm spending $2,000 (exam + travel) for each attempt, the least > > they can > > > > > do is reassure us that they are doing everything possible to ensure > > that > > > > > there are no errors in the grading. > > > > > > > > > > BTW, a proctor told me that voice is the most challenging to grade > > since > > > > > there is more than one way to achieve the desired results > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/5/08, Jonathan Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I ran into the same problem with the R&S lab... there might be 3 > or > > 4 > > > > > > ways to do something, but only one of them gets you points... not > > sure > > > > > > if this is the same thing on the CCIE Voice lab... but I would > bet > > it > > > > > > is. > > > > > > > > > > > > No idea on how they grade the test. > > > > > > > > > > > > But I think a lot has to do with how you use the proctor... so, > if > > > > > > there are 2 ways to do something, that means to go to the proctor > > and > > > > > > say, 'hey, I have way A and way B... which one is preferred?' > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, I would bet that one of those ways doesn't meet the > > > > > > requirements... which is why this test is as difficult as it > is... > > > > > > because you are going to have to know why 'way B' doesn't work... > > > > > > which means a deep understanding of not just how to configure > > > > > > something, but in the way it works at a protocol level. > > > > > > > > > > > > For example... let's say I wanted you to set up CAC for a > specific > > > > > > location. Now, no big, right, just set up locations-based CAC... > or > > > > > > use the GK... both work... both will provide CAC... but let's say > I > > > > > > added to that, 'make sure that you can adjust bandwidth on the > > fly...' > > > > > > now, we know locations-based CAC can't do that, we are looking > for > > > > > > BRQs and we have to use a GK and enable BRQs in CCM. > > > > > > > > > > > > The example is probably a bad one, but it is the only one I can > > think of. > > > > > > > > > > > > I do have a question tho... I have heard from people that the > CCMs > > are > > > > > > slow and nearly unresponsive... so, it can take 2 or 3 minutes > for > > a > > > > > > page to load. Is this true? Whee did you take it? > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, Mark Snow has an example script on the DVDs, that looks > like > > it > > > > > > would take a few hrs to configure on the lab... even if you knew > > > > > > scripting... the requirements seem straightforward, but then he > > adds > > > > > > extra steps to the script... that seem to be from IPCC Scripting > > Best > > > > > > Practices... and all for probably only 4 points on the test... it > > > > > > seems like it would be almost impossible to get any points from > > that > > > > > > scenario... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 10:45 AM, Devildoc > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just had my first attempt at the Voice CCIE lab last week, > and > > of > > > > > course, > > > > > > > i failed. I knew right away after the lab that i failed. The > > reason > > > > > why I > > > > > > > failed was not due to the lack of or inadequate amount of > > knowledge that > > > > > I > > > > > > > possessed but rather the lack of time. I was so nervous and > > stressed out > > > > > > > that I tumbled clumsily throughout the day. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my opinion, the lab was not tricky or even difficult. I > > actually > > > > > think > > > > > > > that i over-studied for the lab. The Proctor Workbook and the > > Bootcamp > > > > > well > > > > > > > prepared me for the lab, so there was no problem with the > > knowledge > > > > > there. > > > > > > > Having said that, i was dumbfounded when i got my scores > result. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And here are my questions. Does anyone know how Cisco grade > > these > > > > > labs? > > > > > > > Is Cisco looking for a specific way to implement a solution or > > any > > > > > method to > > > > > > > implement a solution would work as long as it satifies all of > the > > > > > > > requirements asked of you in the questions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason why i am asking these questions is because even > > though i did > > > > > not > > > > > > > complete the lab, I did complete some sections. I tested those > > > > > completed > > > > > > > sections and verified that all requirements were met, and still > i > > > > > received > > > > > > > 0% for those completed sections. Shouldn't I have received > some > > points > > > > > for > > > > > > > those sections? I know that each question is worth ALL or NO > > point for > > > > > the > > > > > > > correct answer. However, there are many questions in a > section, > > and if > > > > > I > > > > > > > completed a section with all requirements met, then i would > think > > that > > > > > at > > > > > > > least i would get 1 or 2 questions right if not all. But i see > > no point > > > > > > > awarded at all for the completed sections, so that means that i > > must not > > > > > > > have gotten all questions in the section right to get 0%. But > > how can > > > > > that > > > > > > > be since I tested it and verified that all requirements were > met > > and > > > > > that > > > > > > > the solutions that i implemented were working. This only means > > that my > > > > > > > implemented methods were not what Cisco was looking for. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have the similar experience or is it just me? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > JD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > Pack up or back up-use SkyDrive to transfer files or keep extra > > copies. > > > > > > > Learn how. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who > understand > > > > > binary, and those who don't" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand > > binary, and those who don't" > > > > -- > > > > "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand > binary, and those who don't" > > > ________________________________ > Use video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger. > Get started! > > ________________________________ > More immediate than e-mail? Get instant access with Windows Live Messenger. -- "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't"
