From: De Witt, Duane (duane.dewitt@siemens.com)
Date: Wed Feb 02 2005 - 02:45:20 GMT-3
Hi
Might I suggest that since this sysadmin clearly has no intention on
certifying he be removed from this list so that we don't have to be
subjected to his counter productive views.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Balaji Siva
Sent: 02 February 2005 12:44 AM
To: cc ie
Cc: alasdair gilchrist; McLaughlin, Jeffery; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: RE: Slightly OT: Any truth in this?
I think the thing will happen is that we would have GUI based
interface. Many of the products already do. So it is more
user-friendly and requires less knowledge of the command structure.
Use wizards etc to configure QoS, security use macros. (3550/4500
etc_
I think that should all be done since there is no point in making it
rudimentary or interface painful so that you need some super nerd to
configure protocols. It is evolution and I think it is like Unix/dos
world moving to windoze :) ..
Windoze or similar gui based OS has made life easier and more
productive and accessible to common people Ofcouse that leads to more
people wanting to use network based applications and hence more jobs
in the backgrounds for the people with actual protocol/design
knowledge rather than point and click guy.
my 2c
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 22:04:21 +0100, cc ie <davidscottmartin@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 1) This sysadmin is wanker ! his probably had a gut full of network
> guys telling him its not the network stopping his box from working.
>
> 2) ccnps may become worthless, ccie might only become the standard
> benchmark !! ( I doubt it however ), IE still worth getting whichever
> way you look at it.
>
> 3) Yes my kid sister could have configured my LinkSys G home network
> but that doesnt mean she could fix it ! nor understand how it works !
> nor deploy a campass
>
> 4) "... it'a all plug and play now " ! QoS-preclassify my VPN arse
> they are ! a nice shinny GUI will not help a sysadmin design a robust
> multi vendor 'SAFE blueprint' perimeter network !
>
> Dave
> IE Written, CCNP, MCSE, CNE
>
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:53:03 +0000 (GMT), alasdair gilchrist
> <alasdair_gilchrist@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > "Folks, networking,
> > routing, and firewalls are still 'hot' skills, but that's not going
to last."
> > He's not referring to any specific vendor, but networking in
general.
> >
> > So why does it come under the heading" CCIE."
> >
> > Though I do agree with you, with everything else you have written.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > ally
> >
> >
> > "McLaughlin, Jeffery" <JMcLaughlin@sfchronicle.com> wrote:
> > "No, I think the cornerstone of his argument is that CCIE's will no
longer be required."
> > That's not his argument, though. I quote: "Folks, networking,
routing, and firewalls are still 'hot' skills, but that's not going to
last." He's not referring to any specific vendor, but networking in
general.
> >
> > "I believe, perhaps wrongly that the time and effort should be
chanelled into becoming an all round network engineer."
> > I'd agree with you. That's why CCIE is not my only cert, and why
I've worked with many other vendors. I'd recommend (and have on this
list) that CCIE students start with non-Cisco books before delving into
the Cisco-specific stuff. That said, I would argue that the CCIE is
likely to have a fairly good grasp of network concepts that translate
across vendors. That, however, is an argument that has been debated so
many times on this list... Rather than rehash, I'd suggest we all search
the archives for past debates and be satisfied with that.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of alasdair gilchrist
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 11:29 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Fwd: RE: Slightly OT: Any truth in this?
> >
> > Note: forwarded message attached.
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
> > Received: from [202.174.72.227] by web26001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com via
HTTP;
> > Tue, 01 Feb 2005 19:27:02 GMT
> > Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:27:02 +0000 (GMT)
> > From: alasdair gilchrist
> > Subject: RE: Slightly OT: Any truth in this?
> > To: "McLaughlin, Jeffery"
> > In-Reply-To:
<78AC233367A9AA4295E689708A23EE9B211722@sfc-is2.adsfchron.com>
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> > Content-Length: 3802
> > X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: from multipart/alternative by GroupStudy
> > X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: Alternative section used was text/plain
> >
> > No, I think the cornerstone of his argument is that CCIE's will no
longer be required. Networks will diverge between different vendors not
converge to a single vendor. That I believe is true. You can see this
happening already. Cisco's once dominant position is eroding because
they are casting their net to far. Even now Extreme, Foundry etc are
challenging their sacred ground of fast switching. With regard VOIP they
are lagging behind Nortel, manly because Nortel have the Meridian etc.
If your client had a Meridian PBX would you as a consultant suggest a
Cisco VOIP solution or a Passport with BSM voice router/switch. I know
which one I would go for , purely for piece of mind.
> >
> > Security, they are out of the picture, unless you are hopelessy a
Cisco house.
> >
> > I believe, perhaps wrongly that the time and effort should be
chanelled into becoming an all round network engineer. One that can, as
a consultant provide the best possible solution regardless of vendor
loyality. If all a consultant can do is suggest Cisco products because
that is all he knows (or studied) he is not an engineer or consultant he
is merely a salesman.
> >
> > "McLaughlin, Jeffery" wrote:
> > This quote consists of statements unsupported by any sort of
coherent
> > argument. His only clear point is as follows:
> >
> > 1. CCIE's (or skilled network engineers) are in demand now because
some
> > networks are difficult to configure.
> > 2. Network hardware is becoming increasingly simple to configure.
> > 3. At some point in the near future, network hardware will be so
simple to
> > configure that any ordinary user will be able to configure it.
> > 4. Therefore, CCIE's will no longer be required.
> >
> > Since point #3 is the cornerstone of his argument, if it's not true,
then he
> > is wrong.
> >
> > So what's his proof? That it is already at that point for home
users? It's
> > not possible to compare a single-router home user network with a
large-scale
> > network, containing hundreds or thousands of routers, often mixed
vendor
> > environments, and a variety of interconnecting technologies. He says
that "it
> > is close to that
> > point now," but the network I manage is, uh, just a little bit
harder to
> > manage than my LinkSys box at home. The point that this guy is
missing is
> > that networks are inherently difficult to configure and manage for a
simple
> > reason: a network is really a heck of a lot of computers running
distributed
> > algorithms over a large area. Between the interaction of network
devices with
> > each other, and the interaction of end nodes with the network
devices, a
> > network is almost inevitably complex and will require skilled people
to manage
> > it.
> >
> > That's not to say that some day CCIE's won't go the way of mainframe
systems
> > programmers, but I doubt it will happen any time soon.
> >
> > Jeff McLaughlin
> > CCIE #14023
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of Roy
> > Dempsey
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 7:11 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Slightly OT: Any truth in this?
> >
> > Came across this article, don't know anything about the source.
> > However, as someone who's been studying for this for a long time, I
> > hope its not accurate.
> >
> > Quote :
> >
> > "I was interested to see that RHCE (Red Hat Certified Engineer) was
> > listed in slot 3 of certifications IT professionals want to get.
> >
> > CCIE ( Cisco Certified Internetwork Expert) is at the top, which I
> > think shows tremendous short-sightedness. Folks, networking, routing
> > and firewalls are still "hot" skills, but that's not going to last.
> > All this stuff is going to be packaged up into teeny little hardware
> > bundles that any idiot can configure - in fact, it is close to that
> > point now and really is already for the home user. Yes, corporate
> > networks demand a bit more, but not all that much more. In a few
more
> > years, you won't need any high-cost certified type to control even a
> > fairly complex network.
> >
> > But OS support and administration has longer lasting legs. Any
random
> > idiot can't necessarily install and configure a server or maybe even
a
> > desktop PC if it is part of a larger network. Not yet, anyway -
though
> > zero brain configuration of desktops is often possible, servers are
a
> > long way from that. Will it stay that way forever? Of course not -
> > that's one reason I'm glad to be getting close to retirement age:
> > servers are already starting to become appliances, and the trend
will
> > continue, requiring less and less knowledge and intelligence at the
> > point of use. If I were in my twenties or thirties, I would have to
be
> > thinking realistically that the market for my skills may be slowly
> > drying up. We old geezers and young whippersnappers alike can count
on
> > at least another decade of being needed, but my crystal ball gets
> > cloudy after that. "
> >
> > Link (watch the wrap):
> >
> >
http://www.webpronews.com/it/itmanagement/wpn-18-20050131LinuxCertificat
ionGa
> > iningGroundbutCiscoStillonTop.html
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 03 2005 - 08:51:16 GMT-3