From: Gary Duncanson (gary.duncanson@googlemail.com)
Date: Tue Sep 18 2007 - 15:21:37 ART
Keith I agree.
The CCIE still has an awful lot of value. It has kept up with the times and
is as hard today as it has even been. If you can combine college,
experience and CCIE you should be good to go. The difficulty these days for
many of the newer people is experience. Today the IT market has matured and
those that survived the layoffs and kept in work the last 7 years need
convincing to take someone on. It's not just an arcane network held together
by string anymore and *blam* give it to a CCIE. Im not surprised to hear
about the difficult interview process, a lot is expected of a CCIE, and some
of the folks interviewing may be very timeserved and very capable and not
have the CCIE. I work with a few such people.
One of the problems newer people may encounter is lack of exposure to
infrastructure as they progress. When I started I had the run of the
networks I was responsible for so you had lots of hands on opportunities and
learned a great deal (not least the importance of being careful!). That is
less so today for many people with offshoring, change control and redtape.
So it's perhaps more important than ever that people don't short circuit the
learning experience.
The CCIE can open doors. Then you have to walk through it and *be* the CCIE.
That's when all your hard work really pays off. Cheaters beware!
Gary
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Bizzell" <mkbcoolman@gmail.com>
To: <subodh.rawat@wipro.com>
Cc: <smorris@ipexpert.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>;
<joe@affirmedsystems.com>; <Seonghui@vads.com>; <darklordrouter@gmail.com>;
<shiranp3@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 5:58 PM
Subject: Re: All numbers are beutiful ...but below 7000 have something
special
> Subodh,
>
> In my experience, the CCIE definately has value. Unfortunately, there are
> bad apples out there who have cheated to obtain the cert. But I don't
> think
> that has resulted in loss of value, but rather employers are much more
> stringent in the qualification process, as evidenced by your email. This
> has also been my own experience. Since I put CCIE on my resume, the
> interview process has become much more difficult, but I'm glad about that.
> Anyone with a CCIE should be willing to prove their expertise.
>
> BTW...I think my number is Beautiful!! ;-)
>
>
> On 9/13/07, subodh.rawat@wipro.com <subodh.rawat@wipro.com> wrote:
>>
>> I would definitely love to do my CCIE. Hopefully next April.
>>
>> My thought was what is the value CCIE holding these days. Cisco
>> recommends (recommends) that if you are going for CCIE then you should
>> have around 3 years of relevant experience and should do CCNA + CCNP
>> (for R&S).
>>
>> Now we can see people are doing CCIE even with out having a year of
>> experience and without even CCNA. I have 2-3 people who did CCIE without
>> having any experience and CCNA.
>>
>> This makes me thinking that CCIE now is easier than those 2 days lab.
>>
>> I interviewed one candidate yesterday. He was very confident in the
>> beginning and said that he had completed first 3 labs of IE WB 4.x. So I
>> started gradually.
>>
>> But he was stunned on the questions I asked from him. He could not
>> answer a single question. He could not answer simple basic questions
>> like STP (3 switches connected with trunks, what will be the final loop
>> free diagram), Admin Distance (like OSPF and ISIS are adverting same
>> destination network, which one will be preferred). Who knows after 3
>> months , he can be one of Beautiful # after completing all Workbook
>> Labs.
>>
>> And fun came in the last when he said DNS is UDP. When I said that DNS
>> is UDP and TCP both; can you imagine what he replied; he said it
>> depends. If you are using Microsft then it is UDP otherwise TCP
>> (LOL.....)
>>
>> Again a thought.....Surely, I really appreciate people who do CCIE (even
>> now) because it is definitely not as simple as CCNA or CCNP but again
>> the question is what is the value CCIEs have now.
>>
>> Subodh
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Scott Morris [mailto:smorris@ipexpert.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 10:31 AM
>> To: 'Joseph Brunner'; 'Seonghui'; 'darth router'; 'shiran guez'
>> Cc: Subodh Singh Rawat (WT01 - TELECOM SERVICE PROVIDER);
>> ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: RE: All numbers are beutiful ...but below 7000 have something
>> special
>>
>> The funny thing was that people were complaining just the opposite back
>> then... How there were too few dates and that the two-day lab wasn't
>> necessary.
>>
>> *shrug* Can't win....
>>
>> There are ways that things could be made more "interesting" in the lab
>> format, but wouldn't people just complain then too?
>>
>> True, way back when we didn't have workbooks to challenge us. It was
>> just ourselves, the equipment, the DocCD and our own warped sense of
>> humor. Was that harder? Not necessarily. It was just different.
>>
>> I would like to think that the vendor workbooks tend to be harder than
>> the real labs in many ways. Our job is not to teach people the lab
>> exam, but to teach people the technologies and challenge them in new and
>> exciting (and
>> warped) ways.
>>
>> Yes, the troubleshooting is different now than it was back then. But I
>> can honestly say that if I ever found someon going to my routers and
>> changing the console speeds, or barely pulling the cables out so they
>> looked plugged in even though they weren't, or flipping DB60 cables
>> upside down to break things I would put a serious smackdown on them.
>> While it was interesting, it wasn't realistic. Were we challenged?
>> Sure. But in different ways.
>>
>> We also had to deal with IPX, Appletalk, DecNet, X.25, and a bunch of
>> other things that are relegated into the history books of networking
>> now. Some CCIEs had to deal with the AGS and assembling circuit
>> boards/PROMs/jumpers for their lab. Each "version" of the lab is useful
>> for its time. But one era isn't necessarily better or worse off than
>> the others. On the other hand, I remember my main goal was to pass the
>> lab before ATM LANE was introduced. Mostly 'cause I was going to be
>> damned to have to learn anything new by that point!
>>
>> Those who have numbers below 8000 simply have a few years more
>> experience than the numbers around 18000. Hopefully some good
>> experience in there!
>>
>> Whether its about money or not shouldn't make anything less valuable in
>> obtaining the certification. It's all just a different perspective.
>> Remember that the proctors more than likely have seen all the vendor's
>> materials... If nothing else, perhaps we are making it harder for
>> everyone these days. Ever thought about that? (smirk)
>>
>>
>> Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
>> JNCIE #153, CISSP, et al.
>> CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-J
>> VP - Technical Training - IPexpert, Inc.
>> IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
>>
>> A Cisco Learning Partner - We Accept Learning Credits!
>>
>> smorris@ipexpert.com
>>
>> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
>> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
>> http://www.ipexpert.com
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>> Joseph Brunner
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 11:27 PM
>> To: 'Seonghui'; 'darth router'; 'shiran guez'
>> Cc: subodh.rawat@wipro.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: RE: All numbers are beutiful ...but below 7000 have something
>> special
>>
>> Sad when a company with a $192.47 Billion Dollar market cap is stressing
>> about $20 Million Dollars...
>>
>> During the .dot com bust I remember when CMGI would spend that on a
>> holiday
>> party, LOL!
>>
>> I think the CCIE lab should be free to anyone who passes the written.
>> Sure
>> ok make the written harder, with simulator questions, proving
>> configuration
>> skills...
>>
>> But don't treat people who will eventually will promote and help Cisco
>> like
>> drunk Celebrities looking to do "bottle service".
>>
>> (Bottle service is when a night club charges 20 to 100 times the price
>> of a
>> bottle of liquor for the "right" to sit at table, and look cool).
>>
>> I can't wait until Google obsoletes Cisco where "everyone has a sales
>> quota". I'll gladly trade to become a GCSE (Google certified search
>> expert).
>>
>> LOL!
>>
>> -Joe
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>> Seonghui
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 10:56 PM
>> To: darth router; shiran guez
>> Cc: subodh.rawat@wipro.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: RE: All numbers are beutiful ...but below 7000 have something
>> special
>>
>> I prefer the 2-day lab as well (even though I sat and passed the 1 day
>> lab)
>>
>> If you were in Cisco's shoe, instead of taking 1day to test 1 CCIE
>> candidate, now you need 2 days, their 'revenue' from the lab exam will
>> be
>> reduced by half...
>>
>> Don't forget it's USD1350 per exam X number of seats X number of center
>> worldwide X number of days in a year open for testing
>>
>> If my calculation is correct, it's at least a USD20mil business (1 day
>> lab)...
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>> darth router
>> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 10:23 AM
>> To: shiran guez
>> Cc: subodh.rawat@wipro.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: Re: All numbers are beutiful ...but below 7000 have something
>> special
>>
>> I would rather have a two day CCIE number. The two day lab is definitely
>> harder. It is 2 days! Despite your know how and ability to pass day one
>> you
>> could get tripped up by something stupid, like a gum wrapper wrapped
>> around
>> a a cable contact. Cisco ditched the two day format because they felt if
>> you
>> could build the lab, you should be able to troubleshoot it as well. On
>> top
>> of that, do any of you think you could pass the lab reading merely cisco
>> press books? There were not many vendor workbooks back in those days;
>> thus
>> much much harder to learn the relavant info, thus less people passing
>> the
>> lab, and thus a much more difficult overall endeavor. I would love for
>> cisco
>> to bring back the two day lab. That would solve the problem of cheaters
>> and
>> braindumpers. There is no way a braindumper would be able to
>> troubleshoot
>> that rack on day 2 :) Bring it back Cisco!!
>>
>> DR
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/12/07, shiran guez <shiranp3@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > According to your theory that it is easier because there are more
>> > information, either people are stupid or lazy.
>> >
>> > and I think you should try before stating such theory, and after you
>> try
>> > tell us your experience.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 9/12/07, subodh.rawat@wipro.com <subodh.rawat@wipro.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Though I am preparing for CCIE and think that achiving CCIE is
>> something
>> > > a great achievment. But I think that numbers below 7000 or 8000 for
>> that
>> > > matter are more than beautiful. They are hard earned numbers.
>> Getting
>> > > number these days is fairly easy than before, may be bacause
>> vendor's
>> > > workbooks are very close to real lab.
>> > >
>> > > Just a thought.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Subodh
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > The information contained in this electronic message and any
>> attachments
>> > > to
>> > > this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s)
>> and
>> > > may
>> > > contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you
>> are
>> > > not
>> > > the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or
>> copy
>> > > this
>> > > e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies
>> of
>> > > this
>> > > message and any attachments.
>> > >
>> > > WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The
>> recipient
>> > > should
>> > > check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.
>> The
>> > > company
>> > > accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted
>> by
>> > > this
>> > > email.
>> > >
>> > > www.wipro.com
>> > >
>> > >
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> > > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Shiran Guez
>> > MCSE CCNP NCE1
>> > http://cciep3.blogspot.com
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>> The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments
>> to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s)
>> and
>> may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you
>> are
>> not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or
>> copy
>> this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies
>> of
>> this message and any attachments.
>>
>> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient
>> should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.
>> The
>> company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
>> transmitted
>> by this email.
>>
>> www.wipro.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Keith Bizzell
> CCIE # 18798
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 06 2007 - 12:01:13 ART