Took and passed Support 2.0 (919) and Foundation 2.0 (898, 925, 900) today.  
Foundation is grueling because of the length.  Interestingly, I did better
on the Switching part than on Routing or Remote Access, yet I work daily 
with routers and remote access devices and have never configured a set-based
switch in a working environment, just a few practice labs.  I suspect this is
because I studied harder for the part I was least familiar with.  

The tests stuck to the outlined objectives.  A few tricky questions.  Take
the time to read everything very carefully and rule out the wrong answers
until what's left has to be right, even if that's not how you would normally 
express the answer.  I had ample time and finished early.  

I used the Exam Cram for Switching and Support, Paquet's BCRAN book (with a 
name like that, she can't miss) and the Cisco Press ACRC text plus on-the-
job experience, in addition to much time reading the archives of this list.
I also took the online Colt exams from the CCO site, and found them to be 
substantially more difficult than the real thing.  If you do well there,
you're ready.

If you go the Foundation route, you still have to get a passing score on 
each section but the time to take the test is lumped so you may be able 
to allocate more time to those parts where you're weaker.  Pass all sections
and you're $100 ahead.  Fail one and you're out $200.  No stopping the clock
for bio breaks, so ease up on the morning coffee!

Nothing like spending the day in a small room in the back of an airport.

-- 
Jay Hennigan  -  Network Administration  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
NetLojix Communications, Inc.  NASDAQ: NETX  -  http://www.netlojix.com/
WestNet:  Connecting you to the planet.  805 884-6323 

**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_________________________________
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to