From: Atlanta CCIE (atlantaccie@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Dec 28 2008 - 22:21:37 ARST
If Marko and Darby start writing every hour.. GS server will crash for sure
:-D
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Darby Weaver <ccie.weaver@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nice summary Marko.
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Marko Milivojevic <markom@markom.info
> >wrote:
>
> > I "love" when Fortune x00 comes into discussion as a factor that needs
> > to be considered. It would appear that those are the only important
> > companies in the networking world, regardless of the fact that there
> > are at least 20 million other companies in the world that need some
> > sort of a network. If we used the same logic, world wouldn't need more
> > than x00 CCIE's. Yet, somehow, we do.
> >
> > Same applies for network design. There are small companies that do big
> > things. There are big companies that do small things. They all need
> > different networks and different approaches to their way of business
> > Let us not forget the first lesson from CCDA (btw. I highly recommend
> > everyone to take that exam - in fact, I would make it prerequisite for
> > any other cert): networks are there to support business, not the other
> > way round. Unless on understands the business the company is in, one
> > cannot properly design h network to support it. Unfortunately, many of
> > us who try to understand this logic are met with "expert" who don't.
> >
> > There are many of us on this list with various levels of experience
> > and knowledge. Some are good at putting those into words and others
> > are just passive readers. There are also some trolls (like the author
> > of the text you are reading now ;-) ). Nothing we see in this mailing
> > list from anyone is true proof of our knowledge and experience.
> > Granted, instructors have vast experience on CCIE subject, but that's
> > no proof of their real-life effectiveness. We must also forget, that
> > it doesn't proof anything otherwise. We don't know anything about
> > their private contracts and consulting work they may or may not
> > perform.
> >
> > I would we very cautious calling up on anyone from this list and
> > telling them that they don't have "it" to pass one exam. Especially so
> > if haven't seen the exam in question. Which brings me back to the
> > subject of CCDE.
> >
> > CCDE is supposed to be everything Darby so nicely summed up. Fantastic
> > summary. I would agree 100% with the content of that blueprint,
> > only... CCDE ain't all that. 41 of who have seen the beta in all it's
> > glory came out from it bemused. Well, at least 1 out those 41 did. The
> > exam wasn't what I expected. It didn't test my analytical skills at
> > the level I expected it to do so, it didn't allow me to elaborate on
> > the solutions I wanted to implement, it didn't follow my "advice" and
> > my solutions. It didn't test my design skills, it tested my... I don't
> > really know what... general understanding of networking concepts in
> > some weird and unusual way.
> >
> > --
> > Marko
> > CCIE #18427 (SP)
> > My network blog: http://cisco.markom.info/
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 01 2009 - 12:53:10 ARST