There's a question in the 4th CWNA practice pool (D) that poses a situation where a customer has a single 802.11b AP and 2 PCs with 802.11b cards, and they want to improve throughput.
The proposed correct answer is to install a 2nd AP on a channel far enough away from the 1st AP that there is no co-channel interference.
But the answer says nothing about how to force 1 PC to the 1st AP and the other to the 2nd. It's likely that both PCs will associate with the 1st AP they find. I imagine that different vendors have different methods for finding APs, and it consists of listening to beacons, and going through channels 1 by 1, and comaparing RSSI info. But there's no guarantee that they will associate to a given AP, to my knowledge.
In my experience, a given vendor prefers its own AP. We have a mix of Orinocos and Cisco. Orinoco 802.11b cards (Gold cards) really seem to prefer Orinoco APs until we get extremely close, and then they still don't like to let go of an Orinoco AP they already associated with.
So should this question have a more detailed answer or at least a better explanation? At this point, the answer is maybe the least worst answer. It all depends on what is fair to assume. I could assume the customer upgrades their cards at the same time, even though that's not stated, either.
Your reading alot into it.. Learn "how" CWNP thinks!! As in Cisco certs.. You have to learn how cisco wants you to learn it!! CWNP can't have to much in it or in this case they just give it away..
Well, if I could have gotten on the CWNP wavelength and decrypted the hidden plan, I might have done much better. Weak signal, major mental multipath. I don't know what ... I still think they grade the real exam differently. To just knuckle under and give themthe answer they want is a loss, in my book. It's plain wrong.
I prefer to make direct criticism and arguments about how I think testing should be done. I've been in the computer biz for over 30 years. Companies come and go. I used to work for Digital Equipment (used to be the #2 maker of computers in the world). I still believe that quality will listen to a quality argument. I don't expect them to roll over and swallow everything I say. But I think they do listen.
I'm really hopiing that vendor neutral certification wins in the end. I have CCNA, and am part way to a CCSP, having passed the Pix exam. I did Novel CNA a few years ago, and Comptia Network+. Network+ was the best test so far, in my opinion. They focused on practical stuff you really have to know, with just enough theory. Cisco is bizarre at times with their objectives and questions.
I want to see annual based testing. Get things on a cycle. Make the cert last a few years - 2 to 4, depending on rate of technology change. Employers can then see a WXYZ 2006 and know you were current up till that point. An MCSE in NT4 isn't may not be relevent today, but it does say you were once on top of it, and have some years under your belt. If the cert vendor can't manage a project to upgrade their test in a year, they should be rediculed mercilessly and publicly shunned.
I really like the book/voucher/practice test package. I'd also like to see discounts for retakes. Discounts for renewals. Emphasize self paced learning. Classroom should be secondary. Battle the braindumps with bigger question pools that change several times a year.
They focused on practical stuff you really have to know, with just enough theory
seymourbrown, wonderful assessment.
That is the KEY to being a true Professional. I love theory, but the practical stuff is what accomplishes the mission...all the time.
When I was in the military, what mattered most was not how well we could draw the details of a topograhical map.. but how well we could navigate it.
CWNP does listen and make relevant changes. That is what makes them ELITE.