Our students that attempt the actual exam are consistently passing the Troubleshooting section now with relative ease. Why? Well, they are focusing on strategies that we teach in our bootcamps and discuss here on the blog. They are also practicing frequently with the many sample Trouble Tickets we feature in our materials. The premier product for this practice is the Volume 4 workbook.

INE is currently adding more labs to this best-selling self-paced product. Enjoy the additional practice!

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

16 Responses to “More Troubleshooting Labs Arrive in the Volume 4 Workbook!”

  1. Amit Kamur says:

    this doesnt make sense. if they are passing troubleshooting and nobody is passing the v4 lab than your oeq or your lab section must be lacking or else more v4 peple would be passing.

    • @Amit – of the students I have had recently that have failed (in Configuration), not one blamed INE materials. Instead, they realized the flaws in their strategy during the exam, or their lack of preparation.

      The main issue in the Configuration section seems to be centered in running out of time. Either students fall into time traps, or take much too long for certain configurations.

  2. GungaJim says:

    I’m still glad that Amit stated that potential “flaw”. I myself guage a training company’s effectiveness by the number of passing students that utilize their materials. If nobody’s passing using those materials how can that company then proclaim to be the best?

  3. Santiago Enciso says:

    I havent attended for the v4.0 blueprint lab but you cant blame on the materials. Time management is one big issue in the lab. Santiago E

  4. Martin Kiefer says:

    Will there be a dynamip version of the troubleshooting lab?

    I think that would make a lot more sense to have a dynamip version of this than on the other workbooks. Why – because if your home lab does not meet the exact match of hardware you have to modify the configurations, and you might see the errors before going for the practice. A downloadable lab with dynamips that could be ready at startup would be a really cool thing.

    I know you can buy the rack time, but then again. Who does not want to save some money :-)

    Best regards

  5. Haresh Parikh says:

    There is not a single reason to blame INE. INE has the BEST product in the industry.
    Reason for students are NOT passing is either lack of preparation or not proper time management.


  6. Steve says:

    Has the staff from INE attempted R&S V4.0?

  7. Josh Jones says:


    My two cents is this. Don’t solely rely on training vendors. Merely use the training vendor materials to help enhance your way of thinking how to solve problems, to develop good “timing” techniques and building other useful techniques. If you are the type of individual who is looking to get his or her number just by only concentrating how to memorize labs and technique by itself, then you will have a much harder time passing this new V4 format.

    Someone can give you all the tools in a toolbox…but that alone is useless. You need to know what each tool is, and how to use it to be more efficient in getting the job done. As it has been stated before, you can drive a nail using something other than a hammer, but you are just wasting valuable time.

    As a person who sat for the V4 lab (and did not pass), I can tell you all that you need to know your stuff backwards and forwards. Take what the training vendors give you to learn and develop additional skills and time management. Feel free to make up and test your own labs that you may have modified while using the vendor study materials.

    All the information I speak of is nothing new. You all have heard it time and time again. While I agree that training vendors should be held accountable for making the best products available, they should not be held accountable by giving you all the keys to the kingdom.

    For someone like myself, I took the V4 lab with an open mind. I have SEVERAL years in primarily working with Cisco technologies as a consultant. I can tell you that for most of us, the attitude of wanting to figure out why something is not working will get you into trouble. I found that the biggest reason for me (and from the sound of it, many others) not passing was simply poor time management.

    In summary, you have enough material supplied by this vendor. Take advantage of it and really learn how the pieces work individually, and then learn how they all interact with each other. Break the habit of thinking how you would do things in real-world. You don’t have time for it. If you know your technology really well, you will know how to figure most of anything thrown at you with relative ease. Or at least the problem at hand will become apparent much quicker ☺

  8. GungaJim says:

    I love when threads have an air of controversy and i’m going to add some fuel to the fire :D
    @ Haresh
    “There is not a single reason to blame INE”

    As far as i can see, nobody’s blaming INE – but when a vendor comes out and says:

    “Our students that attempt the actual exam are consistently passing the Troubleshooting section now with relative ease”

    Then common sense has to air on the side of what Amit said:
    “if they are passing troubleshooting and nobody is passing the v4 lab than your oeq or your lab section must be lacking ”

    Time to misquote Josh Jones here:
    “Don’t solely rely on training vendors. Merely use the training vendor materials to help enhance your way of thinking how to solve problems”

    Yup. Have to agree here – but this somewhat undermines the concept of an “end-to-end” program to me. Now there seems that there are lots of gaps that you have to fill in yourself to fully enhance you’re knowledge to stand a chance.

    “Using your philosophy, I guess we are the best R&S CCIE Training Company in the world! We are the only company I have seen with a confirmed student passer.”

    Can’t argue with that logic really. But is it enough? Maybe being the best is no longer good enough….

    Let me just clarify my standpoint. I really appreciate INE. I have bought their products and am more than likely to invest in more. It’s just that before people were saying that they passed by SOLELY using INE – i feel that that particular focus has changed now and that there is no longer a true end-to-end product.

  9. Eniola Olaleye says:

    I am an aspiring CCIE and basically use Dynamips/Dynagen for my preparation. Are the V4 troubleshooting scenarios available in the Dynamips workbook as well? Please reply soon and thanks.

  10. Training is always one of those difficult things as far as how you actually measure successes.

    The best thing I will point out to everyone is that we do NOT train to the exam. We will train to give everyone tools necessary to pass the exam. But the two are not directly correlated with each other.

    I can teach people how to each with chopsticks. It’s easy. Will everyone be able to do it? No. Will everyone know HOW to do it? Yes.

    I actually had a good meeting with one of the proctors this morning, and we talked about why people tend to fail the lab. Most people fail troubleshooting. So the good news from our standpoint is that’s not true by our students’ experience. So the next question then becomes, ok, so what’s being missed.

    The answer is the same as it has always been. Time management and question/task interpretation (and whether or not candidates ask the proctor any questions!). That means it is not a “tool” or “training” failure.

    All in all though, this should not be about assessing blame. We can call products end-to-end or all-inclusive or all-encompassing all we want. What is key to that is whether you can come out of the exam and determine whether something was missing or not.

    All of the answers I have gotten from people is that nothing was missing. Something #*%$ happens. While we constantly try to add and improve things, that doesn’t mean anything was missing before. It just means someone thought of something different to do that may help some people.

    Clearly (based on someone passing with our products) things work. Is that good enough for everyone? No, and it would be silly to think that would ever be true no matter who or what we are talking about.

    My two cents for the day. Back to abusing people with BGP! :)

  11. Eniola Olaleye says:


    Thanks for your reply. So is there any plan by INE to introduce the troubleshooting sections in the Dynamips workbook in the nearest future? Regards

  12. Skibike says:

    This is the most common attitude (not only related to CCIE), that people are always finding excuse of their failures in wrong place.
    Bad teacher, bad material, bad vendor, bad weather…
    They simply can’t bring them to admit that THEY failed and problem was inside not outside.
    Chosing the good vendor, good study source is important, but at the end YOU have to make it.


Leave a Reply


CCIE Bloggers