I agree with your statement about poorly worded questions. However, this
is just an excuse for a poorly written test!
Oh just for the record, ever hear of a bandwidth domain? If you have
please let me know about it because I can't find it anywhere.
I didn't say that only CCSE<>knowledge of security! (Man if you had any
clue you would have said
CSS1<> knowledge of security and I didn't say that either! But why not
say CCNP/IP<> knowledge of Routing just to be consistant!) What I implied
was that those 3 tests in combination would give at least a suggestion
that I do know security enough to not get a 0% on an easier test
especially with the same vendor! Additionally, what I said before is that
the CCSE was a test where I had to memorize answers in order to pass the
test pure and simple vs Most of Cisco's tests where what I read in a book
is used the same day on the job. If you know the theory then you know it.
It will be the same in RSA or a RFC or sometimes even Microsoft or other
publications.
Oh can I make this clearer? If I read Doyle, Halabi, Pricilla, Howard or
Moy, I can not only apply their knowledge to any vendor network, but I can
pass Cisco tests based on their books and become more educated in the
process. (I am still making money just from Top-Down) If I don't know what
these 5 authors are talking about then I need to
reread them for I will fail to know networking in more than one
environment. I really didn't have this experience with Checkpoint although
RFC 2401-2410 did help a bit. With Checkpoint I was pretty much on my own
and no matter how many times I did the labs and implemented solutions for
customers, I still didn't help me on the test. 4 routers, Halabi and
Caslow, and a day in an ISP was all I needed to increase from a 10% to a
100% on the BGP section of the BSCN (of yeah about 10 lattes at least).
That is how tests should be.
Reread what I said about the CCSE again... The implication is more
towards the CSS1 and CCIE Sec wri. I just aced the first RSA test and
Microsoft design Sec test and what helped me out for them? Grad School,
CSS1, CCSE, CISSP, work, RFC 2401-2410, RSA Press, white papers,Maeda. If
Cisco can help me get a better score on a non-Cisco test then it should
help me get a better score on a Cisco test! Got the point?
Perhaps what you said about my history situation is correct. If my
customer have pre 12.0 I just tell them to upgrade or I will not work for
them. So far it has worked every time. The same goes for PIXs. If they
are using 5.2 or the 520 I tell them to get 6.1 and upgrade to the 525 and
po's are signed. Just force the issue with them or walk away. It works
well for me :-) It makes your company more money too.
I know Foundry is not the only solution. We have here, Extreme, Juniper,
NEC, Hitachi, Packeteer, BigIP, among other vendors. I used Foundry
because of the straight forwardness of the vendor, quality, and price but
I evaluated the other vendors as well.
Theo
"Kevin Cullimore"
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
05/27/2002 08:44 AM
Please respond to "Kevin Cullimore"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: written [7:45056]
Dealing with poorly worded questions can sometimes serve as good practice
for interpreting the inherent incoherence & unrealism characterizing many
customer demands and concerns in real time.
The relevance of the history questions underscores the distinctiveness of
your situation. You are indeed fortunate to not have to contend with
legacy
code, but many of us lack the financial independence to adhere to your
high
standards, so we're faced with situations where we need to make sure that
the intermediate systems on the far end running code from 1999 can support
the relatively new functionality we were hoping to implement on devices
found at the near end.
Two side notes: Foundry is not the only alternative, and I can verify
firsthand that CCSE<>knowledge of security (although I admit that those
exams contained more questions concerning rfc-based security standards
than
any other exams I've taken).
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: 26 May 2002 4:44 am
Subject: Re: written [7:45056]
> Yeah but I can sympathize with you man because several times on the test
I
> think that Cisco is wrong. Usually, Cisco is right on and I have to
agree
> because the right answer is just here. However, sometimes I don't think
> the answer is there at all or I think the question is phrased in a way
to
> make me fail. I don't like those questions.
>
> So far, BSCN, BCSI, IDS, VPN, PIX, MCNS and QoS had questions that I
could
> not disagree with and though yeah, the correct answer is right here. The
> questions properly tested my knowledge and if I was wrong, I agreed I
was
> wrong. These are good tests. Especially the CLI questions, very
> respectable.
>
> However, for CCNA, CCDA, CID, CIT, and CCIE R&S/SEC written, some of the
> questions I thought were more designed to make me fail rather than test
my
> real knowledge on the topic. It was like, I would take sometimes 3
> minutes just to try to figure out what the hell Cisco was asking. I
never
> had that problem with the other tests. I don't like it either when
Cisco
> plays English language word games on the test. Some of my friends are
not
> native English speakers can they can't understand the questions. In
> particular, I don't like the IOS history questions. They really get me
> vexed. Can you imagine this.
>
> Router>
> Router>en
> Password: ********
> Question: What IOS version introduced NAT?
> Question: 11.0 (Engineer shouts explictives!)
> Question: wrong
> Question: 10.2
> Question: wrong
> Question: 11.1
> Question: wrong
>
> If my router asked me this I would throw it out the window and go buy a
> Foundry machine asap! I don't understand why I need to know the history
> of a command. So far, only Cisco is asking me these silly questions.
> Understanding a topic is quite different from understanding the history.
> Historical questions are just silly I think! I just can't understand
> how I would be a better engineer if I knew the history of commands
> expecially given that I now only use 12.0 and above. If someone wanted
me
> to do below 12.0 I would tell them to find a starving CCIE from Cali!
>
> And get this! I am a CISSP and a CSS1 and CCSE. You would think that I
> know security right? I got a 0% on the CID security section twice! I
> still don't know why. How could I not know enough when I got over 900
on
> each of the CSS1 tests all on the first try??????? I just don't
> understand sometimes.....
>
> Theodore Stout, CISSP
> Senior Security Consultant
> CCSE, CSS1, CCNP, CCDP, MCSE
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Erwin"
> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 05/26/2002 01:57 PM
> Please respond to "Erwin"
>
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc:
> Subject: Re: written [7:45056]
>
>
> How would you know that the particular question does not have a correct
> answer, based on the score you get--69%-- It does not sound convincing
to
> me.
> Even you get that question rewarded to you, it does not mean you will
get
> 70% since I believe it is calculated using a statistical analysis
> technique.
> Even if you can get 70%, it does not mean that you master the topic
well.
> The most important thing is that you understand and master the topics,
not
> just "pass pass pass". Try to get distinction or high distinction
> (unfortunately, the exam grade is only pass and fail).
>
> Good luck for your next exam.
>
> ""CJ"" wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Having obtained 69% and failing the CCIE qualification, There was one
> > question
> > which did not have a correct answer. Whom do I contact at Cisco
address
> this
> > issue. [EMAIL PROTECTED] did not yet replay since the last 4 days.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45108&t=45056
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
