Mentor did something very similar with their vLab offerings. This sounds like a recreation/alternative to those labs, which in my humble opinion were very good from 1) an accessability perspective (globally available and accessible) 2) a learning perspective (taught the basic principle through configuration 3) a documentation perspective (the proposed solutions were usually correct because they'd been checked) 4) a challenge perspective (if one tried to do the configurations without the solution, there were definitely issues that needed to be addressed)
Although they were more training centric versus certification-centric, labs were categorized by skill level (beginner=CCNA, intermediate=CCNP/early CCIE, advanced/expert) The only thing restrictive (and really not that restrictive all things considered) was the relatively high cost per session (min $40 for a 3 router pod for 60-90 minutes of virtual lab time). $40, and one thin mint, btw. More when I have a moment to address each point individually -e- "I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK..." ----- Original Message ----- From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 7:58 AM Subject: What is our Quest? [7:29085] > [If the subject line is ambiguous, please consult your Monty Python.] > > DISCLAIMER: I am involved in several commercial efforts for paper > scenarios and virtual racks. I think the issues raised here, however, > are of value to the community. > ----------- > > Certification (and network learning that is not strictly > certification related) involve scenarios for practice. It's my > belief, however, that not all scenarios are the same. I'm not > referring here to their quality, but to my belief that there are > several types of scenarios that help in different aspects of the > learning process. I'd really like feedback from the community if this > thinking makes sense. > > 1. Technology familiarization scenarios > 2. Complex problem recognition & troubleshooting tests > 3. Specific exam preparation (e.g., CCIE lab time management) > 4. Non-certification (e.g., practice for real-world multihoming without > CCIE restrictions, server interactions, etc.) > > If you were obtaining scenarios over a period of time, what would be > your priorities? > > Type 1 > ------ > > 1a) This can reasonably begin with a preconfigured 1-3 router CCNA > level system, > that just allows CLI practice and the use of show/debug commands. > > 1b) The next level can be anywhere from CCNA to CCIE level, but focusing on > a single protocol/technology. Other technologies are used only to > support > the primary objective. For example, my upcoming CertZone X.25 scenario > starts by establishing OSPF routing (configuration given) over a serial > line with HDLC encapsulation, then walking the student through the > issues > in converting to LAP-B and X.25 encapsulation. > > A basic such scenario gives the objectives and possibly some criteria > for successful configuration, but doesn't give step-by-step guidance, > illustrate common errors, and include troubleshooting. > > 1c) A more structured presentation, typically introducing common errors and > showing how they are discovered and corrected on the way to a correct > solution. > > 1d) Compare-and-contrast multipart scenarios, such as an OSPF scenario that > explores several different aspects of partitioning and virtual links > (e.g., connecting OSPF Area 0.0.0.0 across a non-OSPF domain, fixing > an OSPF partition with a virtual link through a nonzero area, then > examining the other application of virtual links: connecting > noncontiguous > areas to the backbone) > > Type 2 > ------ > > This is much more like an actual Cisco test experience, but giving > the flavor of mentoring rather than time pressure. For example, you > might be given an address plan, and told to implement OSPF in part of > the network and RIP in another. > > You'd first get the individual protocols working, perhaps being > guided through some common errors and how to spot them. > > Next, you'd set up redistribution, again with advice on typical problems. > > Once you have the redistributed routing working, you'd systematically > add other features (e.g., DLSW+, performance management), again with > guidance at each step. > > Type 3 > ------ > > Tests here are closer to the published descriptions and concerns of > the CCIE lab, and include features such as a visible clock, and the > option to choose to get a working configuration for some sub-part, > losing the points but being able to go to the next part. > > In Pythonesque terms, Type 3 scenarios teach you to deal with the > troll, but with the issue being the clock rather than the velocity of > the sparrow. > > Type 4 > ------ > > My main focus here has been exterior routing for both multihomed > enterprises and ISPs, but reflecting best current practice rather > than some of the artificialities of the CCIE lab (e.g., encouraging > rather than forbidding appropriate use of static and default routes). > > The first is Cisco CCIE certification practice, both practice for the > written and the lab exam. The second is to prepare for Cisco > specializations involving technologies such as voice and security. > The third is basic familiarization for the CCIE. > > We can support training organizations, resellers, and enterprises in > staff training aimed at any of these objectives. In addition, we are > here to help in quests not directly associated with certification, > such as advanced technology training (e.g., carrier-level BGP and > MPS). Other related quests are familiarize enterprises with their > planned multihomed and VPN configurations, and do final checkout in a > controlled environment. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29115&t=29085 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
