> and some other odd stuff. IMHO, it's not a bad idea at all that Cisco
> guarantees that CCIE's have been exposed to all of this at least once.
didn't know you could encapsulate ATM inside SDLC/DLSW ;-)
>
> FWIW,
> doctorcisco
>
>
> >From: "Chuck Larri
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.
>Eff
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Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated.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 h
On Thu, 24 May 2001, [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
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 writ
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Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated.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
> coin
.
> >- 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Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated.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. ;^
ched 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Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated.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 reall
gt;
>
>. - 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Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated.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. Per
th 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
> >Sub
ECTED]]On Behalf Of
Brian
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 5:30 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated. [7:5756]
exactly, I was just talking about this with a study partner, and the
obsession with bits in the header is really deep here, and the canonical
inversion stuff mak
rs - that way you
>don't have to know the syntax. I guess the CCIE lab is outdated as well.
>
>Louie
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
>Brian
>Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 5:30 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&g
nd my time studying BGP then how to
read a RIF.
- Original Message -
From: "Louie Belt"
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 5:17 PM
Subject: RE: CCIE written is outdated. [7:5756]
> And a calculator can do math for you, but would you substitute your
> knowledge of math
ten test was outdated. They need
>to update it. I didn't say make it easier. I asked why they still test us
>on
>outdated technologies. I would rather spend my time studying BGP then how
>to
>read a RIF.
>
>----- Original Message -
>From: "Louie Belt"
>
EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 2:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CCIE written is outdated. [7:5756]
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 u
ologies. I would rather spend my time studying BGP then how to
read a RIF.
- Original Message -
From: "Louie Belt"
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 5:17 PM
Subject: RE: CCIE written is outdated. [7:5756]
> And a calculator can do math for you, but would you substitute your
>
E's have been exposed to all of this at least once.
FWIW,
doctorcisco
>From: "Chuck Larrieu"
>Reply-To: "Chuck Larrieu"
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: CCIE written is outdated. [7:5756]
>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:10:27 -0400
>
>This of course pr
;s not a bad idea at all that Cisco
guarantees that CCIE's have been exposed to all of this at least once.
FWIW,
doctorcisco
>From: "Chuck Larrieu"
>Reply-To: "Chuck Larrieu"
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: CCIE written is outdated. [7:5756]
&g
On Sun, 27 May 2001, andyh wrote:
> > I'm still chewing on my CCNP, but in my job in a large NOC, we had one
> very
> > large network (Fortune 50) running DEC, IS-IS and a few X.25 lines,
> several
> > banking customers who used SDLC/DLSW for their ATM machines, some
> Appletalk,
> > and some oth
19 matches
Mail list logo
