To be honest, I'm kind of glad that the written test includes all of the
esoteric knowledge that makes it challenging. I've been waiting since
January
to sit for the lab exam, and I'm still 2 months away. How long would the
wait
be if the written exam were easier?
Another advantage to having such a wide variety of topics on the written exam
are for cases like mine. I've taken exactly 1 "Cisco Approved" course in my
life, the ACRC course, but have over 10 years experience. Being
self-taught, I
am largely a product of the environments I've been exposed to. This left
quite
a fews gaps in my base of knowledge. I'd never worked in an Appletalk, or
Novell environment. Having these topics on the exam forced me to go read
enough
to get a functional understanding of how these types of networks work. The
likelihood of me finding myself entrenched in a Vines environment are not
very
good, but if for some reason it happened, at least I now have a good idea
which
direction to start paddling.
Alan
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated. [7:5756]
> But do I really need to know how to read a RIF? How often do you read a
RIF?
> I know some day you could run into a situation where you really need to
know
> how to read a RIF or know how to configure Apollo, Banyan VINES or XNS. I
> guess I am just frustrated with the trivial parts of this test.
>
> Does anyone else out there feel this way about this test?
>
>
> . ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Howard C. Berkowitz"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 1:49 PM
> Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated. [7:5756]
>
>
> > Just from a learning standpoint, I agree the lab and written should
> > coincide. Perhaps a desktop/legacy specialization might be in order.
> >
> > But there's a finite amount that people can learn and demonstrate,
> > and frankly, I'd rather see somewhat more depth in IP, and also MPLS,
> > than having lots and lots of depth yet being somewhat superficial in
> > the things you need to know about really big networks. Perhaps my
> > design bias is showing.
> >
> > I do wonder about X.25. There's an old Army saying that you never
> > need a pistol until you need one very, very much. I still believe
> > X.25 can be an extremely useful niche protocol.
> >
> >
> > >I agree you should know how to do that stuff but I think the written and
> the
> > >lab should coincide.
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Darren Crawford"
> > >To:
> > >Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 12:04 PM
> > >Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated. [7:5756]
> > >
> > >
> > >> Because as a CCIE you should know how to do this stuff. ;^)
> > >>
> > >> D.
> > >>
> > >> At 01:04 PM 05/24/2001 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >> >The following have been removed from the lab. Why haven't the been
> > >removed
> > >> >from the CCIE written?
> > >> >
> > >> >LAT, DECnet, Apollo, Banyan VINES, ISO CLNS, XNS, ATM LANE, and
X.25.
> > >> >Effective February 1, 2001, Appletalk will also be removed from the
> lab
> > >exam
> > > > >content.
> > >
> > > > x$:0`0:$x,,,,x$:0`0:$x,,,,x$:0`0:$x,,,,x$:0`0:$x$:0`0:$x,,,,x
> > >>
> > >> Darren S. Crawford
> > >> Network Systems Consultant
> > >> Lucent Technologies - Sacramento
> > >>
> > >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> page via email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> pager: 800-467-1467
> > >>
> > > > x$:0`0:$x,,,,x$:0`0:$x,,,,x$:0`0:$x,,,,x$:0`0:$x$:0`0:$x,,,,x
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=5803&t=5756
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
