From: Jason Graun (jgraun@comcast.net)
Date: Wed Jul 14 2004 - 09:38:06 GMT-3
I somewhat agree with the financial statement you made, however I do know of
guys getting $150k offers still, those are not as often but they do still
exist. Also what do you consider low pay for a CCIE? Is 100k-110k
acceptable? I do see those job posting you are referring to where they want
a MCSE and a CCIE for 60k-70k or maybe 80k and that is just insane. If
people are taking those jobs it is mainly because they have no real world
experience and have just been in labs all the time, which is what cheapens
it for the rest of us and the employers not understand what they want, they
want a server/network in one, that is ok but not going to be a CCIE. I know
guys that have had little to no experience but went to Cyscoexpert or
IPexpert, etc... And passed because the instructors understand what is going
on and then relay that to the student. But that student doesn't understand
the fundamentals of Operating Systems, Digital Communication, etc... They
can type some router stuff and that is it, they cannot apply the concepts.
I am speaking from experience here and not out of my ass; I have dealt with
a consultant, who was a CCIE that did not know what proxy arp was, a 101
level concept, and had no idea how to run a project or meet timelines and
not to mention he had trouble understanding routing scenarios I would
consider remedial for a CCIE. He never learned the basics of network
communication; he just kept doing labs and never had real world experience.
I came from a desktop support role into server/application support and then
into network, it was business Darwinism, only the strong shall survive.
Most of the really good network guys I have meet, CCIE or not, have made a
similar progression. I know guys that have told me they are getting there
CCIE so then can get a job in IT?! Never mind that whole experience thing
and understanding what they are doing they assume that employers are going
to look at them and say "wow a CCIE he must be worth 150k and know
everything" which is not true. People will get paid well if they are
willing to step up to the plate, take on some responsibility, use good
judgment and think it through. Check out the salary survey on
www.tcpmag.com for more info on pay rates.
Jason
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Scott Sattler
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 5:25 AM
To: security@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: all september seats are gone
All I know is that the financial benefit for obtaining a CCIE are gone.
MCSE's and CISSP's make the same amount of money now. The jobs req's are
CCNP or CCIE, many employers cannot distinguish the difference. I know
hiring CCIE's went from impossibly expensive to dime a dozen. So what does
that say for the certification? well, there are alot more CCIE's it appears
and a lot less demand for highly certified network engineers. I have noticed
lately a difference of knowledge with a CCIE 1x,xxx in a meeting versus
someone with one of 5,xxx, That 1x,xxx has VERY specific knowledge, like
they went to boot camp for 2 weeks and when discussing anything beyond the
core of knowledge for CCIE certification they are lost. Would that qualify
as "paper" CCIE? (and it has nothing to do with years of experience either)
I wouldn't blame cisco for this, I would blame the boot campers and exam
crammers.
Scott,
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Hill" <Matt.Hill@aapt.com.au>
To: <security@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 12:32 AM
Subject: RE: all september seats are gone
> I disagree Brad.
>
> A CCIE is still a CCIE and should be recognised as such. One thing that
> has made the CCIE certification what it is today is its ability to be
> flexible according to what the market requires.
>
> I daresay that CCIE 1026 (whoever it may be, respect to the individual
> concerned), who did the original 2-day exam 10 years ago would have done
> just as much work as someone doing the exam sometime late this year.
>
> I don't think that employer, or anyone else should belittle or prefer a
> CCIE just because the date is more favourable. Except for the fact that
> CCIE 1026 would invariably have 10 more years experience than CCIE 12xxx
> would (no disrespect to 12xxx either).
>
> I think we can also extrapolate something similar to refer to CCIEs who
> are certified in retired streams such as ISP Dial, Design & WAN
> Switching. These people are still CCIEs.
>
> Anyway, thanks for reading my rant.
>
> Cheers,
> Matt
>
> --
> Matt Hill
> Network Engineering
> Alcatel Australia Pty Ltd
> 180-188 Burnley St
> Richmond, Vic
> 3121
>
> v: +61 3 8687 5739
> f: +61 3 8414 3115
> e: matt.hill@aapt.com.au
> u: http://www.alcatel.com.au
> m: ask and you may receive
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Brad Spencer
> Sent: Wednesday, 14 July 2004 1:58 PM
> To: security@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: all september seats are gone
>
> I wouldn't call a pre-October CCIE Security certification a 'paper CCIE'
> but
> I would call it a legacy CCIE. I hope some in the industry will
> recognize
> the difference between a pre-October and post-October CCIE Security
> certification. No offence intended to the R/S guys grabbing up
> pre-October
> slots. Well maybe a little. :)
> Brad
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Jimmy Zhang
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 5:48 PM
> To: security@groupstudy.com
> Subject: all september seats are gone
>
> Just found that almost all September seats are gone in SJ. (Early
> September
> still has a few seats). October 1 is coming ...
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.719 / Virus Database: 475 - Release Date: 7/12/2004
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
---- > This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If > you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please > contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of > this communication or disclose anything about it. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Aug 01 2004 - 10:11:54 GMT-3