At 5:34 AM +0000 6/20/03, The Road Goes Ever On wrote: >""annlee"" wrote in message >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> To beat further, ensuring the horse is truly dead-- >> >> Look at your telephone. Think about all the features (which really are >> features, unlike some software "features" we all know and love). When the >> power goes out, you can pick up the phone and still get dial tone. The >total >> lag time on a typical PSTN call from one coast of North America to the >other >> is ~70ms, last I saw it measured; in that time it passed through dozens of >> switches on a dedicated circuit which was dynamically created for that >call, >> and was torn down immediately after it ended.
There is a motto in telephony, "once up, always up." It's fairly routing telephony product design to design triply-redundant systems so there's always hot standby yet there's a process instance that can be taken down for maintenance or upgrades. My observation is that many R&S people don't understand this sort of design, and can't explain it to the customer -- which is one of the challenges in making them feel comfortable about AVVID. > > >> The simpler the technology is to use for the average consumer, the more >> complex the system behind that facade. Virtually everyone can make a phone >> call, including toddlers who know to call 911. What makes that system work >> is a lot of design and implementation with careful and thorough testing -- >> in other words, a lot of network engineering. > > >agreed, but what you are confirming is what I and NRF have stated in so many >words. No, the need for skilled technologists will not disappear. But >certainly fewer bodies will be required. > >> >> The "grunt work" of networking will evolve, as it has for every other >> technology, but those who understand what happens and why that happens >will >> still have work -- if nothing else, from cleaning up other peoples' >messes. > > >Funny you should say this. I don't recall what year it was that I read the >employment projection - that in the upcoming five years the need for skiiled >computer professions would quintuple. I believe I was stil going through my >master's program, so that would put it in the late 80's. Quintuple - sounds >like a lot. But the projected requirement for janitors, in raw numbers, was >twice that of computer professionals. Close to a million janitors, and >500,000 computer pro's - up from 100,000 ( just going from memory, and we >all know how that can be. Approved Cisco memory or not? > >As my friend NRF has stateed many times, those who want to stay ahead will >do so not by focusing on the requirements of the past, notr even on the >requirements of today, but rather on the requirements of tomorrow. I can't argue with the need for constant education and experience to go along with certification. Contracts are rough for me at the present, as they are for most other people, and the things that are getting me assignments are more very specific medical knowledge, and AVVID, rather than general R&S. Still, I do get a bit from deep BGP (and have to admit to some satisfaction to finding an ambiguity in the new draft and reporting it to the editor). There's no question that new technologies for service providers still are popping up fairly rapidly. I agree that the enterprise is much less of a challenge, except in certain vertical markets with special requirements, such as limited bandwidth, extremely high availability, etc. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=70976&t=70860 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
