From: Howard C. Berkowitz (hcb@gettcomm.com)
Date: Tue Mar 23 2004 - 11:32:49 GMT-3
At 7:20 AM +0000 3/23/04, Richard Dumoulin wrote:
>Not sure I like your ironical comment. Do u mean we should all be attending
>a 5-day only course to become experts ?
>In my opinion nothing replaces the day to day troubleshoot/research at
>work/lab,
Whether ironical or not, I don't think there is a consistent
definition of "expert" on this list. Obviously, one definition is to
be able to be certified as a CCIexpert.
Other ways of looking at "expertise" could include any or all of:
--read and understand all of, say, the OSPF RFC
--identify the true theory on why certain protocol designs were made.
For example, fairly quick reading of OSPF and ISIS will show they
encode many options differently. OSPF tends to use bit strings.
ISIS tends to use type-length-value constructs. Why was each approach
chosen?
--design and build an OSPF network of sufficient size and complexity
as to stress various features.
--explain how the features will work in a production network, and
what their inherent advantages and limitations they carry. This
point, incidentally, will exclude a LOT of the people who actually
write router code -- they may be very good real-time programmers,
but they are not necessarily adept at designing or troubleshooting
more than one box in a test environment.
--be able to state the requirements for a new protocol, or meaningfully
critique a protocol proposal draft on an IETF link
--be able to state some design choices for a new protocol. For example,
BGP's paradigm isn't going to last forever. Even in the Internet
Research Task Group, Routing Research subgroup, there isn't yet a
consensus. This is getting into research rather than simple expertise
>-----Mensaje original-----
>De: Jason Graun [mailto:jgraun@comcast.net]
>Enviado el: martes, 23 de marzo de 2004 7:27
>Para: 'CHIONG, ERWIN R (ASI)'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Asunto: RE: NetMasterClass training
>
>
>That is good, finally somebody gets it that you must first understand the
>technology and theory behind it before you can become a real expert. That
>is a breath of fresh air around here.
>
>Jason
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>CHIONG, ERWIN R (ASI)
>Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 2:02 PM
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: NetMasterClass training
>
>I just completed a very intensive 5-day course from NetMasterClass in
>preparation for the CCIE lab, and discovered more about this intriguing
>technology than just trying to obtain the certification. I finally realized
>the big difference between learning the technology and understanding the
>technology. I'm sure most of us can learn the technology by studying 24x7
>(and eventually pass the lab). But, understanding the theory and
>applications behind the different protocols and integrating them together is
>another story.
>
>The instructors and staff at NetMasterClass really know how to help build
>this understanding. At first, I was a bit apprehensive in paying for the
>course myself. But after experiencing how much they truly care about
>teaching how the technology works and helping you understand the theory and
>its applications (rather than just helping you pass the lab), I now know
>that their NMC2 course goes beyond the CCIE certification. For all the
>engineers who are really serious about this industry (not just for the
>certification), the NetMasterClass training is highly recommended. (and no,
>I am not affiliated with the company...just a student of this industry who
>wishes to share my experience)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Apr 01 2004 - 08:15:44 GMT-3