Re: CCIE Service Providerv3 - General Question

Narbik,
Sorry I confused you as being under Skyline-ATS but now are back at
HelloComputers, Trinet or whoever. But like everyone said let me just
continue to troll you offline so you don't have to keep making empty promises
like you have for the CCIE Data Center recently or the CCIE R&S videos before
that.

Lastly keep your "Narbiketing" (Narbik + Marketing) emails off the list and I
won't troll you in the first place as this is a technical mailing list.

--
Brian Dennis, CCIEx5 #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/SP/Voice)
bdennis_at_ine.com<mailto:bdennis_at_ine.com>
INE, Inc.
http://www.INE.com<http://www.ine.com/>
From: Narbik Kocharians <narbikk_at_gmail.com<mailto:narbikk_at_gmail.com>>
Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:16 PM
To: CCIEAgent <ccieagent_at_verizon.net<mailto:ccieagent_at_verizon.net>>
Cc: Brian Dennis <bdennis_at_ine.com<mailto:bdennis_at_ine.com>>, Paul Negron
<negron.paul_at_gmail.com<mailto:negron.paul_at_gmail.com>>, Cisco certification
<ccielab_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>>
Subject: Re: CCIE Service Providerv3 - General Question
Brian,
I said I would not respond to you if you talk crap, you are still talking
crap, but what you have mentioned here needs a response.
Also you talk about these new CCNA-SP and CCNP-SP classes that as someone
pointed out isn't even listed on Narbik's or the website of the company you
work (Skyline-ATS) as available.  If you're going to offer solutions to people
here them you should have them available.
BTW, our website is being redone, you will see the classes soon. Having an SP
foundation class that gives the students two more certifications and a very
firm and a SOLID knowledge does NOT hurt at all, especially when the price is
going to be VERY reasonable. I use to do that with my Soup-to-nuts book and I
had people passing the lab left right and center, I am talking something like
that. I am sure you will have it on your website very soon.
When people said they wanted VPLS I put the line cards in to support it. When
people said they wanted dedicated racks for the bootcamps, I put more in.
First of all having your own racks or renting it from a firm makes no
difference to the students.
Secondly, what you provided for your students when they asked for it, were
things that should have been there to begin with, VPLS is part of the
blueprint, and you think that you did them a favor? Its like saying I gave my
students a frame-relay switch when they asked for it. Dude. how did you
getaway with it?
Besides, the way you mention racks its like you have to spend millions of
dollars, you can have two 12Ks and have 8 to 10 students have their own pods.
So you see it is not that big of a deal, I am sure you know how to do this
setup, if not, let me know, we can get in your box remotely and set it up for
you. We have helped many vendors; you wont be the first or the last one.
NOW..the power consumption is another story, especially if you are in CA.
Or how about the "authorized" Cisco 360 videos where you can buy a single 90
minute video with a lab for $395.  People need to be able to pay with Cisco
Learning Credits (CLCs) because no one in their right mind would fork out $395
cash for 90 minutes of video on one topic.  Where do they come up with this
pricing?  Wall Street?  Maybe since Cisco says less than 1% of people are
Cisco CCIE certified the pricing is for the 1% ;-)
As far as 360 Videos, my students dont have to purchase them and I have never
pushed them to purchase anything. They use CLCs to sign up for the boot camps
and not to purchase training videos, you CANNOT purchase VoDs/books using the
CLCs, and you should know that.
BTW, there is a huge difference between a Pinto and a BMW.
We are a small boutique style learning partner where on Fridays when the
students are flying back home or driving back home they dont feel like they
were raped, they feel GR8, because they know they got what they paid for and
then some.
Man, at the end of the day you have to be happy and love doing what you are
doing, and thank God for that blessing, I love what I am doing. I hope that I
can teach like this forever. I am 54 and God willing I will continue until I
feel that the quality is no longer there, or a company buys me out, or I go
bankrupt or health issues, whatever else
Narbik, The company that sponsors you for your Cisco Learning partnership
(Skyline-ATS) contacted us about a partnership about a year ago.
Brian, Micronics Networking & Training Inc. (My company) is NOT an SO under
Skyline-ATS, BTW, we are under Element K which recently changed their name to
skillsoft.
I could never teach the 360 CCIE classes knowing that I only have really 2.5
to 3 days of real instruction between the labs they have do during the class.
I mean they fly in for a 5 day CCIE class and the first day they give you an
assessment?  Why waste a whole day on an assessment? It's only a 5 day class.
Why not have them take the assessment before they come to the class?
The 360 material is a generic guide, you can change it, add to it, cover more
stuff and/or do what ever you like, this is what I am doing today in everyone
of my boot camps, I cover more than what they recommend to cover. I give them
4000 pages of up-to-date supplemental materials, I will NOT teach any other
way, I will NOT use overhead projection to configure labs for my students, I
have my style and you have yours, it is not fair to have both of us teach the
same way, and Cisco understands this.
Narbik will never be Brian, and Brian will never be Narbik.
But I think you did not want to join them because you did not want to pay
Cisco $750 per student, actually most of my students LOVE their assessment
labs, and other material that they get from 360, and it gives them a different
perspective. 35 labs for 600 dollars is not a bad deal at all, because the
quality is very good.
Yes, if you think conducting two assessment labs is a total waste of time, I
dont, but mate our hours are long, on Mon  Wed 9:00 AM  10:30 or later,
normally a little later, on Thursdays we start 9:00 AM and we finish 5:00 AM,
and on Fridays we are back in the class by 9:00 AM. I have not had one
complaint (Thank God), listen. you shouldnt generalize like that.
I know that you promised everyone that you would not respond to this thread
anymore but feel free since you already responded a few times since then.  I'm
sure you'll want to chime in as to why you use LockLizard over doing what INE
does by being 100% DRM free.
So that is all you could say? You guys dont use locklizard and we do.is this
why you called me out to respond?
As far as DRM, hey this is my decision, and I like to go that route, I like my
front door locked, it does not mean that I think that everyone is a thief,
its just the way I like to do business. I have a lot to lose, if and when I
have nothing worth protecting, I will stop using locklizard.
Locking the front door does not guarantee anything, but I have spent months if
not years writing these books and it hurts to see people share them, so I like
to protect myself as much as I can. Thats all.
After telling them how well we're doing and fast INE is growing (making Inc
5000 for the third year in a row next year) they said that we would be "out of
our minds" to become Cisco authorized.
Brain, its NOT the locklizard, it is not the amount of money the company
makes, even if you turn into a fortune 500 company (God willing), this is
teaching, in real estate its location, location and location, in boot camps
its instructor, instructor and instructor. The students dont care how much I
made last year and how much I am going to make this year. Making Inc 5000 for
the third year in a row, does not mean anything to me, you cant be bigger
than ENRON.
I read posts, blogs, and see some VoDs that talk about different IOSes and
technologies, some of them are so way out there, its incredible, but NOT ONCE
I have seen anyone talk about teaching techniques; how do I teach this so
called complex technology, I bet some have NOT even tried to teach themselves
how to teach. Amazing concept.....i bet they dont even know where to begin,
more amazing part of this entire thing is that these guys are instructors.
Since you have been back the relationship of our company has gone to hell, go
back on vacation mate or change your attitude.
Additionally not being Cisco authorized means I can offer scholarships like we
did this year (http://ine.co/2tv4w).  I can offer affordable training to
people in "developing" countries.
We do not call it scholarship, or wave a flag saying Hey.look what we are
doing.. because you need a tax break, if you have to mention it, you better
not do it, trust me on this, next time dont even mention what you have done
and whom you have helped, I guarantee that you will feel much better, when you
mention it, it shows that you did it for bragging rights. We do much more than
that, what you have done is NOT enough.
To end this thread, always remember, INE does not intimidate me, and I am NOT
impressed at all. This stuff will continue unless we do what you recommended,
which was lets not disagree in public forum to the point that it starts an
argument.
I much rather be friends, you can not have enough friends in this world, if I
offended you in any way, I apologies, but lets not do this ever again. Lets
put an end to this stupid useless stuff. I was just answering your questions
and responding to what you wanted me to respond to.
God bless my friend
Like Paul said my last post, if you like to continue lets take this offline.
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:05 AM, CCIEAgent
<ccieagent_at_verizon.net<mailto:ccieagent_at_verizon.net>> wrote:
Nice ad.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
[mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com>] On Behalf Of
Brian Dennis
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 2:25 AM
To: Paul Negron
Cc: Cisco certification
Subject: Re: CCIE Service Providerv3 - General Question
Paul,
If you're so concerned about people learning the technologies and not just
passing the CCIE SP lab, then why don't you offer equipment for them to
practice for the SP lab?  Seems that people getting hands-on practice would
be key if you're as concerned as you say you are.  The only help you seem to
be offering is for someone to buy another class from you.  You saying it's
the best solution when the history of Cisco CCNA and CCNP authorized
"bootcamps" (combining 3 or 4 five day classes in a single
bootcamp) has been horrible to say the very least.  A surprising percentage
of Cisco "authorized" certification bootcamps are riddled with instructors
telling students to use "TestKing" or "Pass4Sure" as they know they can't
teach what they need to teach in the limited timeframe.  Also you talk about
these new CCNA-SP and CCNP-SP classes that as someone pointed out isn't even
listed on Narbik's or the website of the company you work (Skyline-ATS) as
available.  If you're going to offer solutions to people here them you
should have them available.
As far as offering equipment to help people prepare for the SP lab goes when
our SP racks were booked out for 90 days I put more in.  When people said
they wanted VPLS I put the line cards in to support it.  When people said
they wanted dedicated racks for the bootcamps, I put more in.  Now each
student has their own dedicated rack.  Same way for your bootcamps I would
hope. I do all this as a service to our customers because a workbook doesn't
have much value unless you can actually practice the material in it.  Please
tell me that you're providing this same level of service to your customers
so they can properly prepare for the SP lab exam.
--
Brian Dennis, CCIEx5 #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/SP/Voice)
bdennis_at_ine.com<mailto:bdennis_at_ine.com>
INE, Inc.
http://www.INE.com
On 10/29/12 7:52 PM, "Paul Negron"
<negron.paul_at_gmail.com<mailto:negron.paul_at_gmail.com>> wrote:
>I never said they need to start back at the CCNA level. Careful.
>(If you carefully search the thread, I never came close to saying that)
>I'm going to assume your not TRYING to be a smart ass either. ;-)
>
>I agreed with Brian McGhan when he said that MOST CCIE's would not need
>it.
>
>Learning something right the first time is how it should it should be
>done. My point is to NOT  assume we are NOT just trying to get people
>to pass an exam to become a CCIE. ( I think we agreed on this)
>
>I have run into my fair share of CCIE-SP's that LEARNED IT RIGHT THE
>FIRST TIME and STILL do not know how to APPLY it correctly.
>
>CCNA level does not = INFERIOR. It can actually mean
trying to learn
>right the first time.
>
>Sometimes the Advanced Approach skips past some basic things that WE
>(You and I) have experienced, but these newer CCIE's have not. That's
>why they come to us. RIGHT?
>
>Paul
>
>
>Paul Negron
>CCIE# 14856
>negron.paul_at_gmail.com<mailto:negron.paul_at_gmail.com>
>
>
>
>On Oct 29, 2012, at 5:03 PM, Brian Dennis
<bdennis_at_ine.com<mailto:bdennis_at_ine.com>> wrote:
>
>> Paul,
>> Okay I see what you're saying now.  Someone who goes through a
>>vendor's  R&S CCIE training material that focuses on them becoming an
>>"IOS command  jockey" so they can pass the CCIE lab without truly
>>learning the  technologies NEEDS to start back at CCNA level for their
>>next CCIE track.
>> As you stated INE's philosophy is different in that someone won't
>>need to  start all over again and relearn say basic OSPF or basic BGP
>>if they went  through our R&S CCIE training.  This is exactly why we
>>have so much  coverage of the technologies themselves in our products.
>>
>> Honestly I think it's hard for you to argue that learning something
>>right  the first time isn't the best option but I'm glad we finally
>>cleared it up.
>>
>> --
>> Brian Dennis, CCIEx5 #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/SP/Voice)
>> bdennis_at_ine.com<mailto:bdennis_at_ine.com>
>>
>> INE, Inc.
>> http://www.INE.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/29/12 6:04 PM, "Paul Negron"
<negron.paul_at_gmail.com<mailto:negron.paul_at_gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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<mailto:negron.paul_at_gmail.com>
>>> 303-725-8162
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 29, 2012, at 3:14 PM, Brian McGahan
<bmcgahan_at_ine.com<mailto: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<mailto:bmcgahan_at_INE.com>
>>>>
>>>> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
>>>> http://www.INE.com
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
[mailto: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<mailto:ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: CCIE Service Providerv3 - General Question
>>>>
>>>> On 10/26/12 7:29 PM, "Brian McGahan"
<bmcgahan_at_ine.com<mailto: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
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net