From: Priscilla Oppenheimer (cilla@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Jan 09 2002 - 22:11:11 GMT-3
This may not make it to the list, since I'm not on it, but I'll try it and see.
I can attest to the fact that to become a Cisco instructor used to be
extremely difficult. The program was not unlike the CCIE program.
The CCIE program deserves much respect but it doesn't match the skills and
interests of many networking experts, such as the ones in Howard's list.
I'm not a CCIE. Quickly configuring Cisco routers to meet the requirements
of rather convoluted scenarios is just not one of my skills. I'd love to
have the initials. But it would take a lot of resources (time, money, etc.)
to get to that level and it wouldn't get me a job. There aren't any jobs in
Southern Oregon! ;-) Plus CCIE jobs probably aren't well suited to my
temperament.
CCNP matches my level of Cisco router configuration expertise -- advanced
but not an expert. But I am an expert in many aspects of the networking
industry. The CCIE Written test was a breeze. I didn't study at all. You
don't have to believe me, and I don't have time to prove it, but I'll put
it out there anyway. ;-)
With all that said, I'm very supportive of people going after CCIE. It's a
huge challenge and people that have accomplished it deserve a ton of respect.
Priscilla
At 07:19 PM 1/9/02, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
>>Howard,
>>How many other "honorary" CCIEs are there besides you? ;-)
>
>
>Brian,
>
>I'm finding that I'm being misquoted, and I don't find it very funny. I
>did not call myself an honorary CCIE. What I actually said was that before
>the CCIE program, and before there were training partners (roughly
>pre-1995), Cisco had a limited number of CCSIs. Most of these were Cisco
>employees. The qualification procedure was NOT for ICND, which didn't
>exist at the time.
>
>I'm not the only individual to go back to this time frame, who has NEVER
>called themselves an honorary CCIE but has not felt any driving need to
>prove a point by having one. I think Priscilla Oppenheimer can make some
>comments in this area as well.
>
>Not on this list, but people I can think of who are not CCIEs, include
>Tony Li, Yakov Rekhter, Dave Katz, JJ Garcia-Luna-Alceves, Randy Bush,
>Andrew Partan, Radia Perlman, Paul Ferguson, Vint Cerf, Scott Bradner,
>Frank Kastenholz, Karl Auerbach, Sue Hares, Sean Doran, and many others.
>Do you know who they are? Do they know who you are? Are you saying they
>don't know how to network?
>
>>I do a lot of
>>work in the security area and teach/develop CCIE prep courses which cover
>>security topics but that doesn't mean I consider myself an honorary Security
>>CCIE. I will just take the lab and let Cisco be the judge if I'm a Security
>>CCIE or not. This is usually how if works.
>>
>>I don't think that the CCSI should be compared to the CCIE. The CCSI is
>>based on teaching a very low level Cisco router course like the ICND
>
>The _current_ ICND. Indeed, I contributed content to or was on the
>internal review team for, a fair number of Cisco courses.
>
>>. If you
>>think that the CCSI is comparable to the CCIE, you're sadly mistaken. If
>>they should grandfather CCSI's to anything it should be CCNA and not CCIE. I
>>know many CCSI's that couldn't network they way out of a paper bag in the
>>real world and I'm not just talking about the newer ones.
>
>And I know many CCIEs who couldn't design a really large network. So what?
>
>>
>>Lastly if you're not writing CCIE prep material to the actual lab test then
>>you shouldn't have any issues with the NDA. Someone who writes CCIE prep
>>material who isn't an actual CCIE because they are worried about NDA issues
>>sounds kind of screwed up to me.
>
>Someone who thinks this isn't a problem has not had to deal with Cisco's
>intellectual property attorneys. I don't propose to get into the details
>of this, but I think Paul Borghese, among others, can testify there are
>significant sensitivities.
>
>>
>>Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S)(ISP/Dial) CCSI #98640
>>5G Networks, Inc.
>>brian@5g.net
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
>>Howard C. Berkowitz
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 10:55 AM
>>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>Subject: RE: NSSA
>>
>>
>>>Wow, looks like everyones going for their CCIE now. Howard is even throwing
>>>his hat into the ring. ;-)
>>>
>>>Good luck on your lab Howard.
>>>
>>>Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S)(ISP/Dial) CCSI #98640
>>>5G Networks, Inc.
>>>bdennis@5g.net
>>
>>Actually, not quite. Paul and I thought that I might be able to
>>contribute here.
>>
>>At the present time, I have no plans to go through the CCIE process.
>>This is principally a business decision. Since I am partially in the
>>business of generating study materials, and Cisco intellectual
>>property attorneys are quite aggressive, I made the decision that by
>>not taking the CCIE, I could not be meaningfully accused of NDA
>>violations.
>>
>>Also, my CCSI (93005) precedes the CCIE program. At the time, the
>>certification often involved two weeks or more of testing and
>>demonstration, and, indeed, there was a Cisco proposal to grandfather
>>pre-1995 CCSIs.
>>
>>While I thoroughly support the CCIE as a means of advancement,
>>especially in the support area, I think I have enough demonstrated
>>experience that it's really not important if I have it or not.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:56:22 GMT-3