Re: Core Knowledge - Don't mis-interpret this

Hi George,

I completely agree that knowing an RFC name (and purpose) does not make
you an expert, and that was not a point I put forward. My point there
was simply that:

Asking a small number of simple questions about common RFCs does not strike
me as unfair.

Does knowledge of RFCs help you meet other peoples expectations of an
expert? I would say so.

RFCs are authoritative information sources. The features, books, and
all other training material are based on simplified interpretations and
explanations of them (which may or may not be accurate). An expert
might not be expected to know everything about a topic, but may be
expected to know where to look. Knowing which RFCs define a protocol
could be seen that way, they show that you know where to look for more
details. Actually reading those documents tells you what the standard,
multivendor definition of the protocol is, which, combined with a
knowledge of the way cisco implement that protocol tells you which
aspects of the implementation are proprietary, and where issues may
occur with other vendors equipment.

The multiple google IPs on the other hand are transient, and do not in
themselves represent any specific information. Google will return
multiple results when you perform a search, and depending on which you
select you may read old information (e.g. outdated RFCs). Old RFCs do
not indicate which RFC supercedes them, so if you don't know the correct
one already your google search may take you down the wrong path.

Google IPs facilitate a service you may use to find information when you
only have a basic understanding of where to look. RFCs are the actual
authoritative documents which define a protocol, so talking about an RFC
conveys a meaning which is well understood in the industry. They are
commonly referred to in product specs and presentations, so even if you
do not use them as a reference source yourself, knowing what protocols
the more common ones define is really quite useful.

Paul.

George Roman wrote:
> Paul do not want to be rude but to learn RFC numbers does not define you as
> an expert (unless you are out of your mind or have to much free time)
> knowing those numbers does not meen that you know what is inside the
> document itself.
> To me it is like you learn ip numbers by hard just in case. BTW do you know
> the ip address of google ? i guess you are using it every day but you never
> wandered.
>
> Best regards,
> George
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Paul Cosgrove <paul.cosgrove_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>> Hi Salah,
>>
>> Asking a small number of simple questions about common RFCs does not strike
>> me as unfair.
>>
>> Will most customers be interested in them, no. Will they be interested in
>> interoperability, yes. RFCs are developed to provide a common understanding
>> of how protocols should operate. They are the authoritative source for what
>> behaviour should be, and vendor specs refer to them to explain what their
>> products can do. If you are familiar with common RFC numbers, and what they
>> represent, then you will understand product specs more quickly and can
>> understand their differences and limitations. If you want to check to see
>> if a feature is supported by multiple vendors, you can either check through
>> all the vendors product docs for every tiny detail, or you can check to see
>> if they support the RFC.
>>
>> There are obviously a huge number of RFC, and I would have thought most
>> people are (and should be) familiar with a small number; particularly those
>> related to ingress filtering, private addresses and some of the more common
>> routing protocols RFCs. Many text books were written based on old RFCs
>> which have since been updated. If your studies are based on only reading
>> old books you may achieve a good understanding of old protocol behaviour and
>> terminology, but little understanding of how it has changed and how it
>> currently operates. Familiarity with a few common RFCs, and their key
>> differences, may also suggest that someone has really studied the topic in
>> detail rather than focusing their studies on simply producing configs for
>> the lab, perhaps not gaining a good general understanding in the process.
>>
>> Quite apart from their use as a reference of what behaviour is like now,
>> RFCs also define new proposed protocols. They are a good indication of which
>> areas are the focus of current research, and the direction in which the
>> industry is moving. You wouldn't expect someone to know about cutting edge
>> technologies for the lab, but they can be interesting and good for your
>> general knowledge.
>>
>> Paul.
>>
>>
>>
>> Salah ElShekeil wrote:
>>
>>
>>> RFCs?!?i
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Paul Cosgrove <paul.cosgrove_at_gmail.com
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hold times are very important. Customers often ask about failover. How
>>>> long will it take? Well it largely depends on your hold time, since that
>>>> often determines how long it takes to detect the failure.
>>>>
>>>> Paul.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Salah ElShekeil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Agree with u Mohammed, or rfc#, what it will add to my knowledge!!!!!
>>>>> nothing,
>>>>>
>>>>> It s a networking lab exam not a history exam.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Mohamed El Henawy <m.henawy_at_link.net
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> i don't think customers ask about hold time :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pavel Bykov" <slidersv_at_gmail.com>
>>>>>> To: "Joseph L. Brunner" <joe_at_affirmedsystems.com>
>>>>>> Cc: "Larry" <cc13lab_at_gmail.com>; <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 7:20 AM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Core Knowledge - Don't mis-interpret this
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think Cisco may have wanted to simulate customer environment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When I visit a customer, they ask some questions and they do expect
>>>>>>> answers.
>>>>>>> If I give them the correct answer, they ask a few more and if it's all
>>>>>>> correct answers they want me to look at this and that is basically
>>>>>>> living
>>>>>>> up
>>>>>>> to the reputation of CCIE. The customer wants to do business because
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> supplier knowledge. They see what they pay for.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the other hand, if you answer your customer, don't know and that
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> to look it up, well... If the customer thinks it's just a simple
>>>>>>> question
>>>>>>> that you should have known, maybe that will be the missed opportunity
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> huge projects.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's why I think Cisco puts only a few questions in.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pavel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Wed Apr 22 2009 - 13:31:49 ART