Sorry about revealing too much information about the test.
I tried to keep my post as generic as possible, but I felt it was appropriate to be just a bit specific about that one ambiguous requirement because it was just such an excessively "wrong" thing for Cisco to do to me (us).
Based on the amount of editing the moderator did, I guess it might also be out of bounds to reveal how many sims there were and/or what sorts of subjects were included in the sims. But I thought everyone knows there will be sims and they will cover certain key topics, so I didn't think I was revealing too much. Again, my apologies.
Is there a published policy about what sorts of things can be said and what things cannot be said in this forrum?
I certainly do not want to break the rules. But I do want to participate in this forrum in a mutually beneficial manner, so I hope I can at least share some aspects of my testing experiences.
For example, the fact that the technical deficiencies of the sims were a serious problem for me seems like it should be fair game.
Can someone provide some specific guidance?
(Realizing that I am posting a "stupid" question without first trying to find the information on my own makes me hesitate to click "send," but it has been a long day, and I'm already knows as a "bad boy" now anyway, so here it goes).
My original post today was right after taking the brutal test. I was a bit angry about the sims on the test, but now that I have cooled down and collected my thoughts, I suddently realized something.
The "obviously superior" solution that I tried, but thought the stupid sim was mangling --- well, I now think it was actually working just fine -- the pressure was just getting to me, and I was using the wrong show commands to determine if my solution worked or not. (GNS3 is awesome). So I wasted all that time trying different things for nothing!
Moral of the story: Don't panic. The sims are not GNS3, but they aren't as bad as I previously reported.
I'm slowly starting to study for the ROUTE exam. (doing my Bachelors too so it's slow), and I decided to do one lab a day, or every other day when I'm not doing my Math.. I have some questions if you don't mind.
I have the CiscoPress books for the CCNP, CBT Nuggets Videos, Gns3 and Wireshark. What method and sources did you use when you studied? I like that you say overstudy, I like doing that too after all you can not know TOO MUCH. lol
If you have other resources can you tell me what they are? You can inbox me too if you want.
Congrats again man. My road is still long.
Before posting in any community forum on this site, users should familiarize themselves with the Cisco Learning Network Posting Guidelines Quick Reference / Acceptable Use Agreement which contains information on posting restrictions and acceptable posting options https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/docs/DOC-3173
Cisco Learning Network Moderator
The fact that my original post revealed too much information about the test was pointed out to me within a couple of hours of the post, and in fact the moderator had already edited my post before I even knew there was a problem with it.
At the time I wrote my original post, I had not yet carefully read the posting guidelines, but I subsequently read the guidelines very carefully. What I discovered is the guidelines are just common sense -- I thought my original post was 98% within the guidelines.
There remains a discrepency between what my experience tells me is okay and what people in this discussion group say is okay. But naturally I will comply with the limits as recognized by the community, not my own notions.
I do see that my post indirectly gave a clue regarding the quantity of sims, and that I even mentioned the general category of knowledge I thought applied to one or two of the sims, and I would consider this perhaps near the limit, not over the limit of what is okay to say.
The one clear violation was that I paraphrased one of the requirements in one sim, but only because it was flawed: it was ambiguous. Under the circumstances, I would think Cisco should be posting an apology for failing to fix the bad question before now.
Evidently not everyone agrees with this disposition.
Would you consider it egregious for me to say that the test contained some flaws? What about if I said it was a fair test? What if I said it was difficult, or time consuming? Aren't these sorts of opinions considered acceptable?
I think the big difference of opinion is that I assumed that any flaw in the test is fair game to report to the world. But from now on I'll just steer clear.
By the way, this discussion group contains lots of "study questions" that just happen to match the real test questions very very very closely -- those are by far more egregious than the watered down clues I gave. But I have not seen much protest about those posts. I wonder why.
It is acceptable for users to share their exam experience, opinions (positive or negative), study approaches, etc. on the Cisco Learning Network as long as they do not disclose specific exam details and it conforms with other CLN guidelines/policies.
Users should be mindful of posting specific information/details regarding exam questions as disclosing such details is in violation of the Candidate Conduct Policy as described in the Cisco Career Certifications and Confidentiality Agreement http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/downloads/Cisco-Career-Certifications-and-Confidentiality-Agreement_v15.pdf
Lastly, any violations or abuses of the CLN guidelines/policies can be reported for review by clicking on Rebort Abuse on any specific post.
Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.
Cisco Learning Network Moderator
I read the agreement -- I've actually skimmed through it before, years ago, but this time I read it more carefully. The key sentence addressing this topic is:
"You are expressly prohibited from disclosing, publishing, reproducing, or transmitting any exam and any related information including, without limitation, questions, answers, worksheets, computations, drawings, diagrams, length or number of exam segments or questions, or any communication, including oral communication, regarding or related to the exam (known collectively as .Proprietary Information.), in whole or in part, in any form or by any means, oral or written, electronic or mechanical, for any purpose."
One interpretation of this is that we can't share any information that is related to the exam, even if the information is not specifically content-identifying. In other words, technically we can't talk about EIGRP at all if we know it to be on the exam. But of course that would be a ridiculous interpretation of the verbiage.
I guess the key distinguisher is anything that is specifically content-identifying that is not legitmately published should be avoided.
So from now on, I will not longer consider a "bad" question as being exempt from the rule.