Re: CCIE Service Providerv3 - General Question

I think what Kenneth is saying is what I was trying to allude to in my earlier
point. If you walk into a Service Provider Environment saying you are a
CCIE-SP and you think its about weather you know OSPF or ISIS from R&S, your
going to get laughed at and make every CCIE-SP look like a joke. It is simply
a different perspective in that environment.

The differences for IOS-XR in the real world are HUGE compared to the CCIE-SP
routing and switching portion. The posted documentation has a lot of things
that are not used practically.

But if your perspective is simply looking at the CCIE test scenarios, then
listen to what Brian says.

In my CCIE bootcamp, I really try to help you out for the exam and the 20
years I have spent in the Service Provider space. I don't want you being
laughed at. ;-)
I enjoy explaining the reasoning behind the concepts. In other words.. the
BASICS!!! I do not ASSUME you already know. In fact, I had a couple of R&S
candadites in the last bootcamp that actually enjoyed that perspective and I
would say they were quite sharp.(Sharper then most I have met)

That said, I still agree with Narbik. The INE perspective still offers a
different view, which is useful when attempting a CCIE exam.

Paul

Paul Negron
CCIE# 14856
negron.paul_at_gmail.com
303-725-8162

On Oct 29, 2012, at 3:14 PM, Brian McGahan <bmcgahan_at_ine.com> wrote:

>>> Right, there are obviously differences between the two OSes, both in
>>> hardware and software, but for any true CCIE this should not be an issue.
>>> The point of the CCIE is to obtain the level of expert in network
>>> engineering. As an expert you should have a deep theoretical knowledge
>>> of why and how different networking technologies work. OSPF is OSPF,
>>> BGP is BGP, whether it's on IOS, IOS XR, NX-OS, JunOS, etc.
>>
>> Yeah, that's the kind of viewpoint that causes outages. When you start
thinking like this, you tend to make some very, very bad assumptions. Of
course, you might live you in a world >where vendors never change options or
defaults between platforms or even OS revisions on the same platform, never
mind the consideration of interoperability.
>
> Right, there are obviously different caveats to the different
implementations, but at the core they are all functionally the same. If you
know OSPF, and you know OSPF on IOS, you're not reinventing the wheel trying
to learn OSPF on IOS XR.
>
>>>
>>> What I'm saying is that if you're a CCIE in R&S - an *expert* in
>>> Routing & Switching technologies - and you need to start back at CCNA
>>> level for the Service Provider track, then you have failed. You've
>>> failed yourself as you've missed the entire point of CCIE to begin with.
>>
>> There's something about this I find to be fairly offensive, and quite a bit
elitist. Do you honestly believe that achieving a CCIE means you never have to
go back to basics? You never have to review? That you don't have that much to
learn?
>>
>> When you're dealing with an unfamiliar platform and a new OS, I think it's
prudent to probably start with the basics. I'd expect a CCIE to be able to
breeze through it, since it should simply be a matter of reconciling the
differences with what you already know, but to say that you've failed yourself
by making an attempt to cover all the bases? I think that's a bit too
cavalier.
>
> What I'm saying is that if you pass the CCIE R&S and you're not an expert in
OSPF then something went wrong. It's not meant to be offensive, but the whole
idea of CCIE to begin with is elitist. It doesn't mean you know everything,
but it *should* mean that at the end of obtaining CCIE you're an expert in a
specific subset of technologies per the blueprint. I would think that for
most CCIEs the path to SP shouldn't then be back to CCNA. If you go take a
class in CCNA SP you're going to be following topics like this:
>
> - Describe the OSI and TCP/IP models and their associated protocols to
explain how data flows in a network
> - Describe the structure of IPv4 and IPv6 addresses
> - Describe bridging concepts and Layer 2 Ethernet frames
> - Describe classful versus classless routing
> - Describe ICMPv4 and ICMPv6
> - Describe Frame Relay
>
> In my opinion this is not the right learning path to go from CCIE R&S to
CCIE SP, and would be a huge waste of time for most people. They would be
better off spending their time reading through the documentation of XR to find
the platform and feature differences, and then spend time reading the theory
of topics they aren't already an expert in.
>
>
>
> Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593 (R&S/SP/Security)
> bmcgahan_at_INE.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.INE.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Kenneth Ratliff
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 3:19 PM
> To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: CCIE Service Providerv3 - General Question
>
> On 10/26/12 7:29 PM, "Brian McGahan" <bmcgahan_at_ine.com> wrote:
>
>> Right, there are obviously differences between the two OSes, both in
>> hardware and software, but for any true CCIE this should not be an issue.
>> The point of the CCIE is to obtain the level of expert in network
>> engineering. As an expert you should have a deep theoretical knowledge
>> of why and how different networking technologies work. OSPF is OSPF,
>> BGP is BGP, whether it's on IOS, IOS XR, NX-OS, JunOS, etc.
>
> Yeah, that's the kind of viewpoint that causes outages. When you start
thinking like this, you tend to make some very, very bad assumptions. Of
course, you might live you in a world where vendors never change options or
defaults between platforms or even OS revisions on the same platform, never
mind the consideration of interoperability.
>
>>
>> What I'm saying is that if you're a CCIE in R&S - an *expert* in
>> Routing & Switching technologies - and you need to start back at CCNA
>> level for the Service Provider track, then you have failed. You've
>> failed yourself as you've missed the entire point of CCIE to begin with.
>
> There's something about this I find to be fairly offensive, and quite a bit
elitist. Do you honestly believe that achieving a CCIE means you never have to
go back to basics? You never have to review? That you don't have that much to
learn?
>
> When you're dealing with an unfamiliar platform and a new OS, I think it's
prudent to probably start with the basics. I'd expect a CCIE to be able to
breeze through it, since it should simply be a matter of reconciling the
differences with what you already know, but to say that you've failed yourself
by making an attempt to cover all the bases? I think that's a bit too
cavalier.
>
>
> 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 Mon Oct 29 2012 - 16:04:28 ART