Jeez,
That is ridiculous, the program is run by Cisco, a private
corporation. It is not a government entity and requiring those types of
prerequisites makes no sense. How do you quantify experience anyway? What
about a guy who has fifteen years in the industry, gets his CCIE but has
worked on the same technology, same network etc for years, he is not working
with new technology so has no real experience with it either. A "labrat" as
you call it has taken the time to explore the new stuff and will at least
have an idea how to work with it in a production environment. There are two
side to this arguement but I think there are a few who seem to be angry that
a motivated individual is able to study and pull off something that they
believe is reserved for only experienced engineers. It would not be in
Cisco's best interest to load the CCIE with unnecessary baggage. The fact is
that if you can pass the test you are probably an above average guy
technically and have the potential to learn and master just about anything
that could reasonably be expected of a network engineer.
Regards,
Douglas Mizell
CCNP/CCDP
>From: "n rf"
>Reply-To: "n rf"
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: how about ccie salary in US? [7:71143]
>Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 01:48:01 GMT
>Received: from mc9-f36.bay6.hotmail.com ([65.54.166.43]) by
>mc9-s13.bay6.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 25 Jun
>2003 20:12:30 -0700
>Received: from groupstudy.com ([66.220.63.9]) by mc9-f36.bay6.hotmail.com
>with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 25 Jun 2003 20:12:07 -0700
>Received: from groupstudy.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])by groupstudy.com
>(8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h5Q1m2Kp018857GroupStudy Mailer; Thu, 26
>Jun 2003 01:48:02 GMT
>Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by groupstudy.com
>(8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Submit) id h5Q1m24T018856GroupStudy Submission Server;
>Thu, 26 Jun 2003 01:48:02 GMT
>Received: from groupstudy.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])by groupstudy.com
>(8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h5Q1m1Kp018851GroupStudy Mailer; Thu, 26
>Jun 2003 01:48:01 GMT
>Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by groupstudy.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Submit)
>id h5Q1m13K018850GroupStudy Submission Server; Thu, 26 Jun 2003 01:48:01
>GMT
>X-Message-Info: KXYDjjzkRiDlBmn4YorfHSkwJ+8H7+i6
>Message-Id:
>X-GroupStudy-Version: 3.1.1a
>X-GroupStudy: Network Technical
>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Precedence: bulk
>Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jun 2003 03:12:07.0637 (UTC)
>FILETIME=[B9E11050:01C33B90]
>
>Jack Nalbandian wrote:
> >
> > The consensus among all corporate managers that I have dealt
> > with is that
> > CCIEs cannot obtain their status with at least some real
> > experience. That
> > is the consensus. Don't shoot me for it.
>
>
>Those corporate managers are wrong. They may want to look up the term
>"lab-rat" and see how it is commonly used, especially on this ng.
>
>Also, consider this. Those people who really think that the CCIE is
>impossible to pass without experience should freely support (or at least
>have no objection to) an idea I've been pushing for awhile - namely
>requiring a minimum number of years of verifiable networking experience in
>order to be eligible to take the exam, and for which all candidates would
>be
>subject to a random background check to catch liars - similar to how some
>companies run background checks on their job candidates. If it's
>categorically true that nobody could ever pass the lab without experience,
>then this new requirement should not be a problem, right?
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71432&t=71143
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
