Neil's Network+ Notes & Tips

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Thanks Pete, now I know what to do and who to talk to in the future if I get any problems........which I hope I NEVER get

Anyways, I'll stick with the upload site I used, cuz it'll save you guys the extra bandwidth, and it'll give me more space to use for my attachments here!

Oh and thanks, I'm glad you like the posts!

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

If attenuation were nice and precise, where the signal faded away at ***exactly*** a round number, then things would certainly be easier, wouldn't they? But that'd be like me telling you to breathe a round number of breaths every day...

 

You took the words right out off my mouth.
The 2=200 yards and the 5=500 meters is (I believe) just a way to explain the numbers. As long as you can remember the thing, it does not matter.

 

Connection & Connection-Less Protocols



You guessed it: Download and memorize the above table!

Explaination for this is very simple. None of the books I studied from presented them in a simple table.....so I did so for your convienence
NOTE: These are NOT all of the protocols, but they are the most important ones you need to know for the exam. I must confess that there are many ways to remember this, so since everyone has their various preferences, I'll list my various methods. So here's the explaination along with some additional info:

The "IP Pattern" (for remembering Connection-Less Protocols)
Connectionless protocols are very easy to spot. Upon looking at the table, you'll see the obvious pattern. That's right.....they contain the letters "I & P". UDP must be specially committed to memory, but its not difficult as you'll see further down.

The "Opposite Pattern" (for distinguishing between TCP/IP, IPX/SPX & UDP)
Couldn't find a better term, so excuse it! Here's a nice way to differentiate between TCP/IP, IPX/SPX and also UDP. First of all, concerning TCP/IP & IPX/SPX, you should know that if one of the protocols is connection oriented, then the other is the opposite -- connection-less. So using the "IP Pattern" above, we can see that IPX is connectionless. Therefore, the other protocol - SPX - is the "opposite" -- connection! Same goes for TCP/IP. IP being connectionless, means that the other - TCP - is the "opposite"......being connection oriented. See? Its easy! Now since we're on opposites......

Remember: UDP is the COMPLETE OPPOSITE of TCP in every way!

The above point also helps you remember other interesting exam information as well:

TCP: provides guaranteed delivery of data (by using various error-checking procedures)
UDP: does not provide guaranteed delivery of data (no error-checking, thus its faster than TCP)​

But you would've already known this since you read your study text, right?
So since UDP is the opposite of TCP (which is connection oriented....as derived by using the "IP Pattern), then UDP is therefore a connectionless protocol.

Well I've already covered 2 connection protocols and how to identify them, so I'll look at the rest now. NCP (NetWare Core Protocol) is not something that you're "guaranteed" to see on the exam, but I included it in the list because its from Netware and there's no harm knowing it......*just incase!* This is one that you'll have to specially commit to memory, or you could use the "CP" similarity it has with TCP with just one letter difference if you'd like. The others (HTTP & SMTP) speak for themselves. Instinct should tell you that they are "connection" oriented. But for the sake of pattern, then note I highlighted the "TP". In the cases of HTTP and SMTP, it means Transfer Protocol. In the case of TCP, it means Transmission Protocol.

So we can gather that as long as you see Transfer or Transmission in the protocol name, then its connection oriented!

And that my friends, is how I memorized Connection & Connection-Less Protocols for the Newtwork+ exam! And that's how I was able to get 2-3 questions correct in the actual exam! So very sorry I couldn't have gotten more!

As a suppliment (indirect hint *cough cough*), I'll give you the functions of each of those protocols in a nutshell.......for quick revision ofcourse!

SPX: (Sequenced Packet Exchange) intiates, transmits and ends connections between sender and receiver
IPX: (Internet Packet Exchange) provides network addressing and routing services
IP: (Internet Protocol) provides IP addressing & routing functions
TCP: (Transmission Control Protocol) provides guaranteed delivery of data (by using various error-checking procedures)
UDP: (User Datagram Protocol) does not provide guaranteed delivery of data (no error-checking, thus its faster than TCP)
ICMP: (Internet Control Message Protocol) provides error checking and reporting functions
NCP: (NetWare Core Protocol) allows client/server interactions
SMTP: (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) you're kidding me right? Do I *need* to tell you THIS???
HTTP: (HyperText Transfer Protocol) uhhh....umm....I think I forgot this one....maybe you should hit the books!
​

Well I trust you guys will find this one useful. Happy learning!

 

Thanks Neil

Excellent thread

 

Neil,

You've got some errors in the chart above.

It is not accurate to call them "Cable Name." They are Ethernet technologies not cable names. For example, if you connect a Category 5 UTP patch cable between two 10BaseT hubs, you're still running a 10 Mbps Ethernet network, even though a Category 5 UTP patch cable may operate up to 100 Mbps.

Under your section "Ethernet" you've got listed that somehow 10BaseT running on UTP - Cat 5 cabling operates at 100 Mbps. Since the Ethernet technology is 10BaseT, how does it operate at 100 Mbps?

Also under your section "Ethernet" you've got listed that "10Base5" uses "Coaxial RG-8 - Thicknet." Technically, 10Base5 uses two types of cables: 1) The main bus and 2) standard AUI cables between the host and the transceiver connected to the bus cable.

Under your section "Fast Ethernet" you've got listed that "100BaseT4" uses "(CAT...,4...)" cabling. Category 4 UTP cabling was used with Token Ring and not Ethernet so it is inappropriate to mention it here when you're talking about 100BaseT4 which is an Ethernet technology.

Also under your section "Fast Ethernet" you've got listed that somehow 100BaseTX uses "UTP/STP - 2 pair (CAT 5)." Since you're mentioning "cable type" it is more appropriate to say "Cat 5 UTP/STP" only without the "2 pair" part because it may lead to confusion to thinking that you need two pair of Cat 5 UTP/STP cabling for 100BaseTX. There's a similar possible confusion issue with 100BaseFX with the "2 Strand" part and 100BaseT4 and "4 pair." Actually, 100BaseT4 used 4 separate cables.

Under your section "Gigabit Ethernet" you state that 1000BaseT uses "UTP Cat 5." That is incorrect because Category 5 UTP cabling is rated up to 100 Mbps. Officially, it is Category 6 UTP cabling that is officially rated for 1000 Mbps. Category 5e UTP cabling was technically a bandaid while the details of Category 6 UTP were being worked out.

As far as some overall advice to make your chart better to read, how about moving the Speed column to the right of the "Cable Name" column so you can see the pattern between the first number in the Ethernet technology and the speed. Also maybe have two columns after the speed with the titles "cable number" and "cable type." For example,...

Code:

cable number      cable type
Category 3        UTP
RG-58             Coaxial

 

Technically, HTTP and SMTP, by themselves, aren't connection-oriented... the transport protocol they use (TCP) is connection-oriented. That's why they use TCP instead of UDP.

 

Careful with this "pattern"... it works ONLY with these few protocols, so I caution you against using it. For example, NTP and TFTP use UDP, which is connectionless... and IMAP uses TCP, which is connection-oriented... the opposite of what your pattern would indicate.

I guess what I am saying is... learn it right by figuring out why a protocol would require connection-oriented or connectionless communication, and you won't have to rely on a pattern for the rest of your life - particularly when there's no "easy pattern" past these handful of protocols.

 

In order to make you.......and others (who were misled by your post) understand.......or maybe just you.......I'll disect and answer your points one at a time.

I never said I was writing a text book or study guide. I'm merely sharing some of MY study notes, with MY methods and MY terminologies (as I CLEARLY STATED when necessary). I said that this is to be used for quick revision purposes ONLY! So don't expect me to be politically and theoretically correct in minor nonsense that one should already have burned into their memory from A+ and/or the Net+ study text.

I (just like you), was shocked also when I saw that, but argue with Transcender on that.......not me. That standard IS in *their* cable table, so I included it here.........thinking I was doing a "good".

Screw "technically"......we're talking about what the official Network+ study texts -- that's right, plural -- state, not what "Section so-and-so, Article so-and-so and Paragraph so-and-so" of your great-grandmother's IEEE "book of standards" say! Like I said, this is for REVISION.....meaning that you should already know that "technical" and useless bull BEFORE consulting a revision resource. I'm beginning to think that it was people like you who wrote the Sybex Groth book......

Either I and David Groth (Sybex 2005), Toby Skandier (Sybex 2005), Pawan K. Bhardwaj (O’Reilly 2007) and the guys at Transcender (2008 ) are wrong..........or you and your outdated and unknown reference manual are!

The only person who's confused and trying to confuse others, is YOU! For those of you who have "CompTIA Approved" study texts, you'll notice that my last point (above this) applies here also.

There you go with that "technically" bull again! Sybex (2005) states CAT 5e; and the "great" A+, Network+, Security+ Exams in a Nutshell (O'Reilly 2007) and Transcender (2008 ) state CAT 5. But I believe YOU beg to differ.......as your ancient, outdated "collector's item" reference text, says otherwise! I know of the CAT 6 gigabit standard (since in 2003 A+), but me, the text books and the EXAM follow the "CompTIA Network+ 2005 Objectives" (up to CAT 5e).......NOT the latest developments in your grandma's underwear liners! Maybe you should go into those publishers and rewrite their books! Or you should shut the hell up and quit misleading and confusing the innocent!

Here's some advice for you to read ----->



I don't know which century this guy wrote his Network+ exam (or if he did), or *what* study references he used.......hope its not those that myself and this site condemns! Cuz he seems to be very misinformed......which only happens when you consult "unapproved" and "unofficial" references! But for those who have the "Approved" study sources I cited above, then you'll clearly see WHO IS IN ERROR! The REAL facts are there in the texts, so you could either believe the official texts, or believe some "technically" outdated and inaccurate hippie flapping his gums.



PS:
I apologize to everyone for my angry outbust here, but I hate idiots who go out of their way to make these exams sound so "technical", intricate and so difficult. They go around stirring up fear and doubt in future exam-takers minds and cause alot of confusion. Anyone with the texts can compare and see that this fool is INTENTIONALLY trying to confuse unaware future exam-takers who are desperately looking for every bit of exam info to guide them. That's the reason why I decided to sacrifice time to GIVE BACK to those who are in the position that I was once in. I DON'T HAVE TO DO THIS! Why the hell would anyone reveal their personal study methods? This is a favour I'm doing and its my way of helping others who are honestly and genuinely working hard towards this exam!

I know how intimidating the exam is, and how fearful and doubtful you can become when you see people posting unnecessary "technical" bull$h!t babble to sound somewhat "intelligent" or "deeply knowledgable". Because you'd get worried and think "well I didn't see this in the text" or "it sounds important and I should do alot of reading on it", etc. And this results in you spending (wasting) precious study time, reading and MEMORIZING technical crap that will never come on the exam! I learnt this lesson from here the hard way! That's why I'll be posting a separate guide of "Exam Tips & Preps" and "Study Resources"........as I stated in the first post of this thread. This is to protect you from fools like the above poster. People like him are only out there to mislead, confuse and instill fear, doubt and intimidation into future exam takers. Everyone can clearly see that from his post! Afterall, you don't see suckers like that posting exam tips, preps, hints or anything useful or valuable that you could learn or use to assist you in your studies to pass the exam! Do they care about you? Did they ever think of "giving back" to the source that helped them? Or give back to those who are in the same place they once were? You judge for yourself!

Once more, I apologize for my angry outburst, but I do not apologize for what I SAID! The truth must be told.......hard or easy.
So "who the cap fits, let them wear it!"

 

I agree. That's why I made a NOTE that said these (the protocols I listed in the table) "are the most important ones you need to know for the exam." My pattern covers what I presented, NOT connection & connectionless protcols globally. There's a big difference.

Point taken. The pattern is for passing the exam......as far as my related discussion was concerned. My real life and practical skill application never required me to know any of that.......among other things. But yet other more important theory knowledge was used to get the job done. So what I'm saying, is that NOT EVERYTHING we're told to study, is really *that* important or useful. Otherwise we would've been required to completely know and memorize the study texts and required to get 900/900 for the exam to show that we know "everything"! But that's not and will not be possible......because we don't need to know every little thing. We have to accept the fact that many things are "just there", and they operate in the background without the need for us to do anything. While other things demand our full attention and expertise.

For that reason, while new stuff are added with the new exam upgrades -- unnecessary and useless stuff are also being removed! Along with the old technology ofcourse. Example: You could be a good electrician, but even if one little measly power supply fan stops working, you throw the whole psu out and replace it with a new/working one, rather than replace the fan (or whatever electrical problem needed to be fixed). So what profit was your "electrical" knowledge of "how it all works"? Or lemme just be plain and simple: do you know all of the TCP port numbers and their functions off your head? Do you know each and every numerical error code from memory? But they're very important aren't they? They sure do help you narrow in and fix the problem huh? But yet they're not important for YOU to remember them all huh?

So I hope you understand what I'm trying to say. Not everything is *that important* to know.

 

Dude... calm down. We're trying to help you improve your notes and guides.

But... if you learn WHY protocols are connection-oriented (get your terminology straight, man...) and connectionless protocols, you don't need a pattern.

Certification study is NOT just "to pass an exam"... it is also to make you a better tech. And if you study incorrectly, you're NOT going to end up being a better tech. If you learn the skills to make you a better tech, you don't need a faulty pattern.

And dude, that pattern only works for those protocols. So what happens if there are other protocols on the exam? And before you say, "Oh, there aren't"... know that 1) you are bound by non-disclosure... including disclosing what is and isn't on the exam... and 2) you didn't get all the questions in the exam pool. Other people COULD very well get other protocols.

Even if YOUR real-life experience didn't require that you know other protocols besides HTTP and FTP... please realize that 1) you won't always be at that skill level in your job, and 2) most everyone else won't/aren't either.

So please, don't take offense when I say that that particular pattern should be avoided. There are plenty of other useful ones, so you shouldn't get all butthurt about a criticism of one of them.

No, we don't need to know every little thing. But you DO need to truly understand **WHY** an application-layer protocol should use TCP or UDP. THAT is my point. As someone who has been a senior network admin before, I'm here to tell you that that knowledge IS important, and you DO need to know it.

You're actually arguing my point. If you truly are a good electrician, you know about a whole bunch of things related to electricity... not just "what's on the test". If you study just what is on the test, you are more apt to throw out that PSU instead of diagnose the power supply fan. If you understand that "other things are working; therefore, the PSU is not broken", then you're more apt to make a valid diagnosis. You can't do that if you rely on crutches and shortcuts to help you pass.

I know more than just "what's on the exam". Know how? Real-world experience. Not an exam.

And yes, when I do encounter them, I make sure I learn them.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to say. Other people who have done this for a looong time are trying to tell you that you are mistaken. You're not listening, because you're too busy trying to defend your guide, which you worked very hard on. I understand that - trust me, I feel your pain, cause I've been there. But having faulty information in there won't help people. You should want to improve it. I always want to improve my training products. That's why I have product testers critique the certification training products I create: so their criticisms can help me improve my products. If they don't critique it... I can't improve it, and the errors will remain.

It is your choice: do you want to learn from people who are already in the IT industry (some of whom are trainers, writers, and practice exam developers), or do you want to rage at the machine and continue down your path of "I don't care what they say, I'm gonna do what *I* want to do, regardless of whether I'm right or not?" Your choice. I ain't posting here to help me, or to make me look good... I'm posting for YOUR benefit, and for the benefit of those who come along behind me to study your guide.

 

I'm not going to go over every single point that RHLee brought up or that you challenged... but I will hit a few.

What RHLee is talking about is that your terminology is incorrect, and that's what is causing the majority of the confusion. 10BaseT is NOT a cable name. 100BaseFX is NOT a cable name. 1000BaseCX is NOT a cable name. They are Ethernet Physical layer standards. It is incorrect to call them "Cable Names".

Yes, 10BaseT can use CAT 5 cable. And yes, CAT 5 can go up to 100 Mbps. But not connected to a 10BaseT Ethernet interface, which is what your chart shows. CAT 5 on a 100BaseTX Fast Ethernet interface can go up to 100 Mbps (as your chart correctly shows).

In truth, Groth is probably the best Network+ study guide out there.

If you already know that "technical and useless bull" before consulting a revision resource... you don't need to consult a revision resource.

In truth, I agree with you that you only need to know one cable type for 10Base5: coaxial RG-8. That said, you do need to know what an AUI is and in which cases you'd use it.

Technically (yes, I know how much you hate that word, but it IS necessary if you want to use correct terminology), the term "Thicknet" is used for the Ethernet standard (10Base5), not the cable... but people do use them interchangeably. Still... it's not correct terminology. Use what you will...

RHLee is not immune from my criticism: 100Base-T4 is a Fast Ethernet implementation, which can use CAT 4, just like Token Ring does. However, it only required CAT 3, and could use CAT 5 (as your chart shows).

It does look like you are saying that 100BaseTX requires 2 pair of CAT 5 cables, so I can see where the confusion is coming from.

In truth, you can't even really say a "2-pair CAT 5 cable", because CAT 5 cables have four twisted pairs of wire; 100BaseTX only uses two of the pairs in CAT 5 (or higher) cable.

You are correct that 1000Base-T can use CAT 5 cable at a minimum.

That said, it's not recommended, because errors are much more likely. Who knows what the exam will say is the right answer? It's good to know the minimum... but it's also good to know the reasons why you shouldn't use the minimum and the alternative cable types you should use, just in case... both for the exam AND for real life.

Addressing each of the points without resorting to attack is a MUCH more effective technique. Perhaps you should try it sometime. I understand you are hurt by his criticism... but he IS trying to assist you... he's not trying to put you down or belittle you like you are doing to him. He's posting for YOUR benefit, not his.

If you were truly sorry... you wouldn't have done it in the first place, considering that you didn't edit your post to add that post script - you would have simply removed the angry/hostile portion of your remarks.

As are you confusing people with your inaccurate terminology... but you don't see me getting angry with you or calling you names. But you didn't "intentionally" use inaccurate terminology, did you? Of course not. Neither did RHLee "intentionally" try to confuse anyone. In his defense, sources from other exams (he's got the MCSE and CCNA) might provide information that conflicts with what the Network+ exam states - you may see that as you advance in your certification studies.

As are we giving back. You may not agree with us... but that's not going to stop people from trying to correct you when you are incorrect or inaccurate or confusing.

As someone who writes stuff for a living - AND who gets his work heavily edited - the best advice I can give you is... don't take it personally. He's not calling you an idiot. He's not saying you shouldn't be writing a study guide. He's trying to improve your study guide by saying that he believes you are incorrect and gives you reasons for his advice. But you arrogantly thumbed your nose at him without considering what he had to say. And I could visibly see you getting angrier and angrier that someone might actually question what you had written or how you had written it!

But Neil... that sort of an attitude never helps YOU improve. If I hadn't learned how to take criticism... I'd not have made it as a writer.

I agree with him on some of the points; and on others, I disagree. But I wholeheartedly disagree with you taking a hostile approach with him: he's trying to help, and you're calling him names. It's not necessary. By all means, defend your points, but resorting to attacks and cursing him does not help.

Think about it... what does he gain by purposely misleading, confusing, or instilling fear, doubt, and intimidation? That makes no sense - at all. If he were a seller of certification training materials, and were trying to get people to buy his stuff, I could see your point... but he's not. He is merely posting what he believes to be correct. So I think you've gone just a bit off the deep end regarding RHLee.

Actually, he DOES post exam tips, preps, hints, and what he believes to be useful information:
link1
link2
link3
link4
link5
link6
link7
...and many, many others. Go through his posts... he's constantly attempting to "give back".

By your definition, I am the same as he, am I not? But if you were to ask the fine people on this forum if I care more about myself or "giving back" to the community... I have no doubt what most of them would say.

I DON'T agree with some of the stuff RHLee says or some of the advice that he gives. But I do believe that he IS trying to help you out to the best of his ability. He's posting to help YOU out, just like you're posting to help people out. What's the difference?

The angry outburst wouldn't have been an angry outburst if you had calmly addressed the points. You can say that you disagree with him - and make your point a lot more effectively - without being angry and without calling people "fools".

As you stated, "the truth must be told.......hard or easy." Let's hope you remember your own words when truth is being spoken back to you.

 

Huge temper problem on this thread...pointless. Usefull info., Thank's everyone

 

Sigh.. ok Neil, please take on MB's comments, as i know he is trying to help you.

There is no point in getting angry on an Internet forum, all that happens is that you end up feeling frustrated and disheartened.

Never post if you are feeling annoyed or angry.. wait a while, calm down and respond accordingly.

I don't want to close this thread as there is much useful information on here and the discussion still has potential to continue to be informative.

Pete

 

Let's hope it doesn't come to that!

 

...or once Neil has completed this thread, added all of his notes and tips, made any amendments he feels as necessary, the mods can delete the extra / not needed comments, lock the thread and then pin it up.

 

I Agree This thread is beginning to look like a flame war than an study aid

 

Neil - does your study notes cover RAID and Backups?

 

WOW! Temper, temper! Goose-fra-bah

Looking back at my post, I see that I did do some unnecessary damage there.......never lost my temper on an online forum like that before! I had a hard day yesterday folks. Was at the race track for preliminaries, and that was one heated day! Anyways all was going good and I was getting up close with all those pimped up Mazda RX 7s & 8s, Evolution 5s & 7s, and the Lotus and BMWs, and having some nice chats with the drivers from both my country and other Caribbean and international countries. Anyways, at the end, 2 of the best local racers had some minor hiccups with their fuel lines and were delayed a little from doing their lap time. The officials said they'd both get to do it. So when they finally were ready to do so, the head official (who everyone hates, but was only there because his old friends on the board voted him to come back for this race), came on the mic and said that nothing's left to do and he thanked everyone for coming out! He changed the decision and cut 2 of the best local drivers from the race! Everyone was totally pissed and those 2 drivers along with their supporters (basically everyone in attendance) put on some cussing and started erupting. Those guys drove onto the track and started doing some serious high speed laps.......trying to burn out their anger and frustration I believe. So now the final lineup only consists of ONE local racer for the highest group. Total biasness went on there and to think, those two guys were betrayed by one of their own! The official came back on the mic and demanded the guys to come off the track.....to that, all the other drivers expressed their feelings by revving their engines (to block out his voice on the speakers). Everyone knew it was unfair.......no wonder no one likes the guy. So he sent one of the official's vehicles to be parked on the track, but that didn't stop the guys from driving round. Then he sent a second.....no stopping.......then he sent a third, then a fourth.......and by then the guys had probably burned out their rage and calmly exited. But everyone was still furious......the 3 Guinesses I had after didn't help much either. Me and the guys had 3 after-race "hangout sessions" between the race track to home and that still didn't help. And that's when I decided to calm down by going online and relax my mind by checking out the latest on CF! And the rest is history..........

I was caught at a bad time I guess. Anyways I don't have time now to quote and give my opinions, so I'll just try to put it all in a nutshell.

First of all I respect BosonMichael and *most* of his points. I admit that the terminology I used for the column header "Cable Name" was probably not the best, as I was in a hurry using every bit of free time I had to compose it. But that's the ONLY inaccurate thing of it! The cable specs themselves are very accurate as they were composed from more than 4 RELIABLE sources. I keep saying that this is for REVISION pruposes -- meaning that after you've read through your study texts more than one and are ready to write the exam, you could just use these for last minute revision. I'm not saying to throw out your books and just use my posts to pass the exam! I designed these to be used for REVISION.....quick reference. And I provided some ways to quickly remember them. So once you've completed your exam studies and you know the right thing, then you're most likely to dismiss, bypass and excuse a mere little column name that I didn't use the right terminology for, but once you have the general idea, the column headers could be removed and you'd know exactly what's going on and what the table is saying. I was in a hurry and made a mistake by using the term "Cable Name", but that doesn't say that what follows are pure inaccuracies!

Like I said, I was also shocked when I saw Transceder's cable table showing that a 10BaseT using a CAT5 cable transmits 100mbps. That confused me a bit, but I didn't ignore it and that's why I posted it here. The other issue about the 100BaseTX using CAT5 - 2 pairs, simply means that of the 4 twisted pairs in the cable, that only 2 pairs are used for transmission. Its crazy that people would think I meant that the cable only consisted of 2 pairs of wires! Only someone reading that for the first time would get that idea. Someone who studied the text book and who's revising would know better. So that comment was totally unexpected by me. So I believe that the correct term is "misunderstanding" and NOT "inaccuracies". I guess that not everyone see's my "quick notes" the way that I see them and understand them. I don't spend much time and go indepth on certain simple things because it means that you're already supposed to know that in your sleep. If you read A+, Network+, Security+ Exams in a Nutshell you'll notice that in their summary chapter, they focus on the essential facts and leave out the little baby stuff. And the Sybex does that to some extent. I'm not here to spoon-feed anyone from scratch -- you have your study text to do that. I'm just dealing with the "meat" that you should spend extra time revising. And anyone who wrote the exam can tell you that many of the questions were based on these topics that I discuss.

So apart from those misunderstandings, you see that the other points that RHLee raised were REALLY inaccurate. I'm not trying to defend my posts. I'm trying to protect future exam takers from getting mixed up. Becase if I'm stating one thing and RHLee is saying the opposite......then this thread is getting nowhere and people are gonna get mixed up and confused. I suppose that as you journey deeper in your career path, certain things become more technical and tend to contradict the "entry-level" stuff you learnt in the beginning, but as I said: we're dealing with the CompTIA Network+ 2005 Objectives and I believe we should stay on THAT path and *limit* the technical stuff there, for the benefit of those who have not written the exam as yet and are reading this......otherwise they'd get confused. Afterall, this forum is for discussing the Network+ exam........so let's keep our technical knowledge up to that point.

If anyone wants to get more technical than that, then the advanced forums like "Microsoft" are available for that and I'd be happy to have discussions on those advanced stuff THERE, as I'd be learning from experienced people. But you need to know what you're saying HERE, as some can get carried away. Example: Its like having an indepth Server 2003 or Active Directory discussion in the A+ forums.....people studying A+ might think that they need to know all that stuff for the exam and should spend valuable time studying that additionally. But not because they need to have that knowledge in the real world, means they have to study it at that point in time for the A+ exam. Hope you understand what I'm trying to say.

Basically what I'm saying is that we need to watch how technical we get on CERTAIN topics.......especially those that conflicts with a certain exam's objectives. Cuz if RHLee is gonna say that 100BaseT4 cannot use CAT4 cabling, and that 1000BaseT is not possible to run on a CAT5 cable, then those are very dangerous statements to make in a forum where people are looking for reliable info to use for their exam study! And that's the type of confusion I'm trying to prevent.

Anyways, enough said.........didn't mean for this to be sooooo looooooong. I'd just like to thank UCHEEKYMONKEY, Mr.Cheeks, Bluerinse, Adrian.Popescu, Sparky.........and BosonMichael (to some extent ) for bearing with me and at the same time finding the info to be useful........at least it assures me that my stuff is helpful. I don't have any problem at all with taking constructive criticisms, as long as your facts are right. So yes, I'll continue posting and the moderators can edit that "particular" post and remove the unnecessaries (if they wish).......as long as they keep my main points with my references there.

I know that everyone taking the Net+ will find my next post VERY useful as its gonna deal with the actual exam prep and probably some psychological aspects of it and the exam approach. So stay tuned!!!