Sorry about that Chuck...I dont know you but after reading this I can
feel your pain. You will get it next time...
Thanks for the info. :-)
>From: "Chuck Larrieu" >Reply-To: "Chuck Larrieu" >To: "Cisco Mail List"
>Subject: CCIE Lab Report - unsuccesful >Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 18:34:20
-0700 > >Hey, everyone, how you all been? > >The short story is I did not
make it to day 2. The rest of this is a bit >long winded, and easily
skipped. > >First of all, I was quite pleased to find upon reading
through my Day 1 >scenario that there was nothing I couldn't do, given
time. There are plenty >of practice labs from several different sources
which cover all the core >topics, so there were no surprises for me. >
>Secondly, I was quite pleased when during my review of Day 1 results
with >the proctor, he told me they were going to change the written
instruction >on a particular section because of the solution I used. I'm
actually quite >surprised it hasn't been done before. I was grudgingly
given points, >although I was told my solution was definitely not what
they had in mind. > >However, in the end, it was a few simple omissions
that cost me the points >I would have needed to squeak into Day 2. >
>Only one of the six of us who began together was invited to the second
day. > >Things I learned: > >1) having the core topics down cold is
CRUCIAL. No kidding! > >2) Time is crucial, but not, I believe, in the
way I have seen it discussed >in many places. I highly doubt that typing
80 words a minute versus my 20 >WPM was the difference. Not when I spent
as much time as I did >contemplating. You can't think it. You have to
know it. > >By 2:00 p.m. I knew I didn't have a prayer of hitting all the
requirements. >At that point I started counting points, putting myself in
a defensive mode. >By quitting time, if I got full credit for everything
I thought I deserved, >I would have had 31 points. As I found out in my
review, I missed a few >simple things, and blew myself out of the water.
This leads back to the >internalization of the core topics. You can't be
thinking about how to >configure anything. You have to just bang them
out, the same way you bang >out shaving or washing your hands or eating
your lunch. > >3) Methodology is crucial. You have to have a good
methodology that is >internalized and is habitual. You can't be thinking
"what's next?" I don't >believe it matters what your methodology is, so
long as you are consistent >and quick. My own methodology failed me
because I was constantly adjusting, >rather than banging it out. > >4) I
spent a good two hours last night in my hotel room debriefing myself. I
>have six pages of notes regarding my day one experience. This will form
the >basis of my study plan for my second attempt. I know that it is
highly >unlikely I will have a scenario like the one I just worked on
next time >through. But I will focus on methodology and speed. > >5) Good
rapport with the proctor is helpful. I was able to get the >information I
needed by carefully wording my questions and making sure that >my desired
result was understood. The proctor is under a bit of stress >himself,
with so many folks vying for his attention. He may think you are >asking
something you are not. I made sure that if I was not getting an >answer
that made sense that I clarified my request, so that the answer was >one
that helped me understand. I will say also that the test I saw was
>reasonably clear. The questions I had tended to be the result of outputs
>from various show and debug commands, to clarify what the expectation
was. > >A few other comments: > >I was far too aggressive in scheduling
my lab date. Should have pushed it >out 60 days. Don't be in a hurry.
Those without a lot of hands on need to >spend several months of several
hours a day practicing. No two ways about >it. > >There has been a lot of
discussion about the patch panels used in the lab. >All I can say is that
the panels are clearly labeled. IMHO you have nothing >to worry about.
That said, I did have to revisit the rack twice, in order to >make a
cabling change. This was purely the result of a chicken or egg
>situation, and not due to any difficulty with the rack itself. People
with >home labs know well the issue with hooking up routers back to back.
> >I sat next to a guy this morning ( a day 1 candidate ) who was getting
up >every few minutes and going to the back of the rack to move cables
around. >Completely unnecessary and driving the proctor nuts. There is no
need for >any candidate to touch the back of the rack. > >You can't let
little stuff stop you. Those with extensive hands on >experience know
that sometimes routers do funny things like boot into >rommon> or behave
as if there is an extensive paste going on in the >configuration
dialogue. I have a router here at home that boots into rommon >once in a
while. A reload has always done the trick ( knock on wood ) >sometimes
leaning on control-C will stop a misbehaving configuration >dialogue. No
this is not NDA because I did not go to troubleshooting. I >experienced
one of these things as I got into the routers at the very start >of my
lab. Stuff happens now and again. Rule number one is "don't panic" >
>With a six to seven month backlog, I have plenty of time to follow up on
the >action plan I developed for myself as part of my debriefing session.
That >plan includes extensive reading and practice using the
configuration guides >from CCO. Highly recommended, as one of my proctors
told me. > >One more little thing. I was permitted to bring in a small
clock, and a >picture of my wife. The clock to help me keep to my
schedule. There is a >clock in the lab, but I prefer having something in
my face. Whenever I was >discouraged I looked at my wife, who seemed to
be saying "you'd better pass, >honey, because I've already spent your
raise" ;-> > >Lastly, I had the pleasure of meeting several people who
frequent this list. >It was quite a thrill, and a definite pleasure to
put faces to the names. >The socializing helped me relax, or helped me
deal with my disappointment, >depending on when we met. It was indeed a
privilege, Jason, Drew, Dale, Rob, >David, not to mention my fellow test
takers Todd and Wendy, and couple more >whose names I am unable to
remember. Proctors, too. I enjoyed the >opportunity to work with you. >
>Well, I'm back here at base camp. 11,000 feet to go still. See you all
along >the way. > >Chuck >---------------------- >I am Locutus, a CCIE
Lab Proctor. Xx_Brain_dumps_xX are futile. Your life as >it has been is
over ( if you hope to pass ) From this time forward, you will >study US!
And I ain't kidding, neither! >_________________________________ >FAQ,
list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html >Report misconduct and
Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
