From: Chris Riling (criling@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Nov 12 2007 - 19:05:52 ART
Nice!
On 11/12/07, Carpenter, Michael <Michael.Carpenter@nationalcity.com> wrote:
>
> really happened example: College of Ohio Works First Electronic Center for
> Educational Services
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Scott Morris [mailto:smorris@ipexpert.com]
> Sent: Mon 11/12/2007 2:43 PM
> To: 'Scott Vermillion'; 'Dennis Dumont'; Adato, Leon; 'William Nellis';
> 'darth
> router'; M_A_Jones@dell.com
> Cc: cisconuts@hotmail.com; joe@affirmedsystems.com; pauld@marshallcomm.com
> ;
> jlogginsccie@san.rr.com; tom.nohwa@gmail.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com;
> 'Marci
> Carpenter'; Carpenter, Michael; 'Leon_home'
> Subject: RE: CCIE Important Interview Quesition asked by Sunrise, Swiss
>
>
>
> hehehe... Very true. I remember a few years back a buddy of mine wanted
> to
> start a user's group in northern CA and thought that Bay Area Routing
> Freaks
> sounded cool until I burst out laughing and told him that the acronym
> would
> scare people away...
>
> :)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Vermillion [mailto:scott_ccie_list@it-ag.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 2:19 PM
> To: smorris@ipexpert.com; 'Dennis Dumont'; 'Adato, Leon'; 'William
> Nellis';
> 'darth router'; M_A_Jones@dell.com
> Cc: cisconuts@hotmail.com; joe@affirmedsystems.com; pauld@marshallcomm.com
> ;
> jlogginsccie@san.rr.com; tom.nohwa@gmail.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com;
> 'Marci
> Carpenter'; 'Carpenter, Michael'; 'Leon_home'
> Subject: RE: CCIE Important Interview Quesition asked by Sunrise, Swiss
>
>
> >Any ideas for names, by the way? I think that Networkers Anonymous
> >wouldn't give the right connotation. ;)
>
> Especially since that would acronym to "NA" (as in "Not Applicable")...
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis Dumont [mailto:dfdumont@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 12:38 PM
> To: Adato, Leon; William Nellis; Scott Vermillion; swm@emanon.com; darth
> router; M_A_Jones@dell.com
> Cc: cisconuts@hotmail.com; joe@affirmedsystems.com; pauld@marshallcomm.com
> ;
> jlogginsccie@san.rr.com; tom.nohwa@gmail.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com;
> Marci
> Carpenter; Carpenter, Michael; Leon_home
> Subject: RE: CCIE Important Interview Quesition asked by Sunrise, Swiss
>
> Let me expand on the idea of a guild a bit for clarity.
>
> An apprentice is anyone who has completed some form of training. This
> could
> be as simple as a completed series at someone like an ITT Tech Institute,
> or
> a BS in computer science. This gets you membership into the 'club' you
> would only need to submit you 'credentials' and get assigned to a local
> 'journeyman'
> for subsequent training and experience. In the best of all possible
> worlds
> that person would be at your current employer but that assumes a high
> level
> of penetration - and I won't make that assumption. No fez, and no back
> rooms filled with cigar smoke - just fill out the paper work and you get
> your 'card' back in the mail with a letter to contact your local
> Journeyman.
> And She/he also gets one letting her/him know you exist. After that its
> between the two of you.
>
> Journeyman is a second submission of credentials, and I'd consider all
> current numbered CCIE's to already be in this position. I'd likely also
> include a few other industry certs that have similar scope and recognition
> within their respective disciplines. I'm thinking of things like the
> Master
> Oracle certification, or the Redhat Certified Architect. Note this WOULD
> NOT BE SPECIFIC TO NETWORKING!!! An advanced (and preferably
> practical) vendor certification would be valid for entry into this level.
> It would also allow you to take on Apprentices and part of your CONTINUED
> CERTIFICATION would be dependent upon your working with Apprentices, and
> THEIR SUCCESS. After all you don't have to be a good teacher for someone
> to
> learn from you. However the converse is also true - if you know nothing
> no
> one can learn anything from you either. This keeps the tie to industry
> certification for recognition (of the Journeyman level) and also begins
> the
> split into various Disciplines. A Journeyman would be encouraged to
> pursue
> multiple disciplines.
>
> As for Master, I really think their are only a very few people who have
> demonstrated significant contribution to the art to qualify. Furthermore
> I
> think you have to also demonstrate significant contribution to the art to
> gain entrance. No one can deny the contributions of people like Scott
> Morris(Nearly everything Networking), Linus Torvalds
> (Linux) or Larry Wall (Perl). It would be the first task to get these
> people and others like them not only to promulgate the idea, but also to
> sit
> on the board to review submissions (for Masters).
>
> For Master class I'm specifically proposing a submission process similar
> to
> what the people at OpenGroup (http://www.opengroup.org/itac/) are trying
> to
> do - but with a purely technical focus. It would entail an actual project
> (including ALL DOCUMENTATION) wherein it could be demonstrated that a
> NOVEL
> APPROACH or a NEW TECHNOLOGY had been applied or created.
> These would then feed into the training material for other levels.
>
> This approach solves the issue of technology innovating us into oblivion,
> as
> this feedback loop keeps everyone moving forward. It also solves the
> issue
> of what makes a 'master' by using the same process used for granting a
> PhD.
> You must innovate.
> The guild then becomes one of the bodies moving the art forward, rather
> then
> trying to keep up. Also similar to a PhD, the Master classification would
> be in a particular discipline, say Database, Programming, Networking,
> System
> Mgmt, etc.
> There is also the possibility of Intellectual Property rights. In this I
> can see under certain circumstances that the guild would own (the IP of)
> the
> submission and would have the right to not only disseminate the IP to its
> members, but also gain financial backing for its licensing. After all we
> have to figure out how to PAY for such an organization and I'm not very
> fond
> of fees - although I think for a while it would have to be that.
>
> I hope that helps clarify my idea. Feel free to tear this one apart - or
> chime in support. I really do think we need something to pull us out of
> the
> mess we are in now. There is no way to determine right now a good IT
> person
> from a mediocre one - and mediocrity is what keeps our salaries low and
> removes us from consideration for higher positions. After all this a free
> market and the supply (of bodies with some
> certification) is high compared with demand. That is why CCIE's in
> Cleveland,OH can bank on about 80K/yr from a large employer - at best. I
> don't want to be in that realm any longer. I want my kids to think, "If I
> want to make some REAL money I can become a Lawyer, a Doctor or a IT
> Master."
>
> Yeah I'm dreaming but then isn't that the point? See the goal and move
> toward it - don't complain about not being there yet.
>
> Another $0.02
>
> Dennis Dumont
>
> --- "Adato, Leon" <Leon.Adato@nationalcity.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry for the late reply, but just a counterpoint to Scott and
> > William's
> > thoughts:
> >
> > What Dennis *might* be suggesting is the beginning of the evolutionary
> > process that gives us today's AMA (American Medical Association).
> >
> > One of the challenges I find with the "50 or so"
> > organizations is that
> > they are largely vendor-based. CCIE does not apply to Nortel. MCSE
> > does not apply to Novel. RedHat certification does not indicate AIX
> > expertise. It may imply a level of conceptual familiarity, or even
> > experience based on the likelyhood of cross-platform environments. But
> > an Ophthalmologist is not licensed only for Alcon brand techniques or
> > procedures. And taking it further, even if you go to a plastic
> > surgeon, you can safely assume that they can start an IV, perform an
> > emergency tracheotomy, give CPR, etc. Even if you wouldn't trust a
> > cardiologist to do factial reconstructive surgery, you know they
> > understand the fundamentals.
> >
> > So what I'm talking about is a vendor-agnostic organization that goes
> > beyond the "clubs" that I see out there today (dba associations and
> > the like). This group would set the curriculum for the training
> > organizations. It might even administer centralized standard testing
> > that would be distributed or hosted by local training org's.
> >
> > Speaking to the guild metaphor (and it's only a metaphor), I don't see
> > it as a question of good ol' boys in fez's with secret handshakes as
> > much as a more formalized process of ownership and mentorship.
> > Studying under an IT mentor would give the mentor an extra set of
> > hands for certain tasks, and it would provide the apprentice with name
> > association and the chance to experience environments they might not
> > have access to on their own merits.
> >
> > I am, of course, extrapolating a lot of political what-if's to
> > continue to overlay the medical metaphore onto IT, but I see it not
> > only as possible but also beneficial.
> >
> > Stepping back from my (typical, for those on this list who don't know
> > me) naieve rosey-sunglasses outlook, I would submit the following
> > observations based on 17 years of involvement in IT:
> >
> >
> > 1) no automated test can accurately weed out "paper tigers".
> > 1a) practical tests such as in the CCIE do a better job, but it's
> > still possible to "fake it"
> > 2) prolonged interaction - both with an individual and watching that
> > individual work in real situations - rarely will fail to separate
> > those who actually know a topic from those who do not.
> >
> > Presuming those 2 (ok, 2.5) items to be true, it suggests that direct
> > observation over time is the best way to "certify"
> > what someone actually
> > knows. The challenge in IT is that the only time this happens is when
> > someone has been hired for a job. And the problem there includes 2
> > realities:
> > 1) when a person is deemed not-knowledgeable, companies are limited in
> > what they can tell the NEXT employer
> > 2) at higher levels (CCIE, for example), the person being hired is
> > often supposed to be the best expert, so by definition there is
> > frequently no peer-level employee to accurately identify what this
> > person does or does not know.
> >
> > The apprentice - journeyman - master (or some modern
> > equivalent) would
> > mitigate that, and might even boost IT workers value in the eyes of
> > employers and businesses. Having a master craftsman on your staff may
> > mean something to customers and investors.
> >
> > Leon Adato
> > ==============
> > "Measure what is measurable, and make measurable what is not so"
> > - Galileo
> > Reply to: adatole@yahoo.com
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: William Nellis [mailto:nellis_iv@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 1:22 AM
> > To: Dennis Dumont; Scott Vermillion; swm@emanon.com; darth router;
> > M_A_Jones@dell.com
> > Cc: cisconuts@hotmail.com; joe@affirmedsystems.com;
> > pauld@marshallcomm.com; jlogginsccie@san.rr.com; tom.nohwa@gmail.com;
> > ccielab@groupstudy.com; Adato, Leon; Marci Carpenter; Carpenter,
> > Michael
> > Subject: Re: CCIE Important Interview Quesition asked by Sunrise,
> > Swiss
> >
> > The way you keep less than qualified people from taking your position
> > or the sale, is by demonstrating your value day in and day out. Not by
> > creating an exclusive club. The best thing we could do is, not form an
> > "industry guild" (actually, on that note, there is probably only about
> > 50 of them already... which means none of them hold any merit)... So
> > industry certifications are supposed to give some ability at this.
> > Given, they are not perfect, the CCIE is challenging enough to move
> > beyond rote memorization, and it is also unbiased.
> > Even if it is not
> > perfect, having this unbiased system is better than having a bunch of
> > guys sitting with elk hats making subjective votes on who can join the
> > union. How do you measure that? How do you offer a business case for
> > value based on subjective matters? If the unbiased system isn't
> > working, lets improve that instead. I'm of the opinion, that while it
> > aint perfect... it does weed out allot of people.
> >
> >
> > I honestly dont have the answer to all these questions, one of the
> > main problems is IT is a constantly sliding window. It develops at a
> > pace in which whatever standards you set now will need to be
> > reevaluated every
> > 24-36 months for relevance. Another problem is there is a constantly
> > short demand for talent. There is ample "people", but the companies
> > need talent. I think there are allot of people in Ops and Tier 1/2
> > positions that want to move around and develop but are challenged
> > because there are lots of other people there, while companies are
> > looking for tier3/4 type people to work on their ever increasing
> > networks... (for sake of simplicity I put all people in 4 tiers for
> > this
> > discussion)
> >
> > AND, the Tier 3/4 people today that don't stay abreast of the moving
> > targets lose value over time. Tech is rough man, you got to work just
> > to stay afloat. These networks aren't getting any easier, and it seems
> > the more companies rely on them for increasingly mission critical
> > reasources, it keeps getting hairier.
> >
> > So, when interviewing people, your not looking just for someone to do
> > the job today. That isn't as bad, but also looking for people that can
> > understand new technology and advances As they are being written and
> > coming out, and be able to grow with them and design for them. So your
> > looking for someone with promise, someone you can invest in and get
> > ROI out of. Someone with critical thinking, experience to some degree,
> > and probably a Cert to get their foots in the door.
> >
> > I don't think the "bashing" of these so called Paper CCIE's is the
> > same as the bashing we used to do of paper MCSE. it's a whole other
> > level, and given, they may not be the BEST of the BEST in every
> > permutation, and you can pick them apart, they have reached a
> > milestone in their education that, like it or not, makes them an
> > asset.
> > Not for every
> > opportunity or every organization, but an asset none the less.
> > Because, at the least, you can ensure they have some semblance of
> > problem solving capabilities, or that they worked extra hard to get
> > it. So, like it or not, the reason CCIE is the most respected cert, is
> > because it is the best the industry has.
> >
> > CCIE = Aptitude + effort. So, you can say some people don't have as
> > much aptitude, but in that instance, it means they had to exert more
> > effort.
> >
> > And another reason to stop the "Paper CCIE" stuff already, it's a
> > plaque, darn it.
> >
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > r/s
> > William Nellis IV
> > nellis_iv@yahoo.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Dennis Dumont <dfdumont@yahoo.com>
> > To: Scott Vermillion <scott_ccie_list@it-ag.com>; swm@emanon.com;
> > darth router <darklordrouter@gmail.com>; M_A_Jones@dell.com
> > Cc: cisconuts@hotmail.com; joe@affirmedsystems.com;
> > pauld@marshallcomm.com; jlogginsccie@san.rr.com; tom.nohwa@gmail.com;
> > ccielab@groupstudy.com; Leon Adato <leon.adato@nationalcity.com>;
> > Marci Carpenter <marcarpe@cisco.com>; Michael Carpenter
> > <michael.carpenter@nationalcity.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2007 5:17:20 PM
> > Subject: RE: CCIE Important Interview Quesition asked by Sunrise,
> > Swiss
> >
> > Back when I was a hiring mgr, I had a few questions I asked that had
> > multiple right answers. Case in point, "You have just typed, 'deb ip
> > pack det' in your session, but nothing shows up.
> > What's wrong and how
> > do you fix it?"
> > Yeah there's LOTS of answers to this one, but I was looking for the
> > thought process, not the actual answer.
> > I don't see how 'lifting' router or fixing it still attached to the
> > rack applies, but I'll say this - I concur wholeheartedly with the
> > other comments in this thread around 'paper' CCIE's. I thought I'd
> > never admit such a thing existed, except I've interviewed too many of
> > them.
> > They couldn't design there way out of a wet paper bag, and probably
> > couldn't troubleshoot an inverted 60-pin serial cable.
> >
> > I think this points to an even more pervasive problem in the IT
> > industry
> > - lack of governance, or more correctly of an admission process to the
> > industry.
> > Just because I can cram a Transcender or TestKing test puke, doesn't
> > mean I know anything about the technology. Quite frankly all
> > certifications EXCEPT the CCIE Practical exam are fundamentally flawed
> > by being a multiple-choice questionnaire. The correct answer appears
> > in the test question simply for the person to select - but I digress
> >
> > I said this before on other forums, but I think WE need to decide what
> > to do with OUR industry. I think we need a guild, or some form of
> > regulatory body, like what Lawyers, Doctors and even CPA's go through
> > to ENTER their respective professions. We need people like Scott
> > Morris, Linus Torvalds, et. al. to be on the Board and to delineate
> > how the rest of (that haven't already proven our worth through years
> > of
> > contributions) get into the Guild. I think a system that follows the
> > Apprentice, Journeyman, Master kind of hierarchy would work well and
> > has significant recent and historical validity.
> >
> > What do YOU think? How do we either prevent less-than-qualified
> > people from taking our positions (or our sale), and/or how do we
> > validate that we as a person know what we are talking about and can be
> > trusted?
> >
> > Just my $0.02
> > Dennis Dumont
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com/>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com/>
> >
> >
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
> > ***National City made the following annotations
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
> > This communication is a confidential and proprietary
> > business communication.
> > It is intended solely for the use of the designated
> > recipient(s). If this
> > communication is received in error, please contact
> > the sender and delete
> > this communication.
> >
>
> ============================================================================
> ===============
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com/>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Dec 01 2007 - 06:37:29 ART