Hmm, maybe the fault lies in companies that only hire people who have a
specific set of certifications to manage their networks. I, and for that
matter several other non-CCIEs I know, could easily have handled your
problem. I'm betting that you never even got the chance to see us, as the
insistence on having a CCIE never let us get past the recruiter, HR
department, or whoever made the hiring decision. I have met a lot of CCIEs
that don't understand the first thing about supporting a production network.
In fact, having a CCIE does not guarantee anything to anyone about anything
other than you have passed the CCIE lab.
If, in fact, your network has mutiple OSPF areas with a non-broadcast
Frame-relay WAN, redistribuition of RIP, EIGRP into damn near everything,
BGP confederations for three routers, and no static routes ever, the CCIEs
would be emminently qualified to support your network. A CCIE number does
not guarantee the ability to isolate and correct non-cisco issues, or the
ability to clearly articulate a thought to a non-techie person. For that
matter, the same can be said for hiring someone on the basis of having a 4.0
GPA, or being class president, or being a friend of your uncle Larry. When
looking for someone to support your network you really need to sit down and
discuss what that means and having an open mind as to the ability of the
person sitting across from you to do the job. Of course, that is a lot
harder than calling a recruiter and saying "I need a CCIE to manage my
network".
- just doing a little "not getting through HR" venting!
""Sean Young"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> What's wrong with CCIEs today? I know that I am making a general
> assumptions; however,this is the second time that it has happend to the
> company that I work for. We have several tacacs servers that use to
> authenticate users. These tacacs servers are running on a combination of
> Linux and Solaris platforms. While I was away at the Networker
> Conference, one of our tacacs servers (solaris) die due to hardware
> failure and the amazingly the tacacs process on the Linux die. Because
> of this, everyone has to login to the routers and switches via local
> account. We hire these CCIEs to maintain the network while I am away for
> a few weeks. None of these CCIEs have any background with tacacs servers
> running on Unix platforms. As to our problems, the simple to do is just
> to restart the tacacs process byfirst: "killall tac_plus" and second
> "/usr/sbin/tac_plus -C /etc/tacacs/tac_plus.cfg" but these CCIEs guys
> have absolutely no clues. Furthermore, they don't even know how to use
> editing in Unix (i.e vi or emacs) and ended up screwing up my tacacs
> configuration files. We have a few employees that need tacacs account
> but these CCIEs guys have no clues how to addnew users to a configuration
> file which if anyone has done tacacs on the unix platform know that you
> just modify the configuration file tac_plus.conf and restart tacacs
> process. These CCIE guys say that they come from a windows environment
> so they don't have too much with Unix platforms. I also notice that a
> lot of CCIEs these days lack the Unix skills that are required for the
> Service Providers environment. Most don't even know how to tunnel
> X-application through Secure Shell (SSH). I still remember those days
> when Cisco Engineers are very well verse in both unix and routers
> skills. I long for those days again. Comments anyone?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=13161&t=13151
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
