I think the CCIE demonstrates an ability to learn at a certain level, and
guarantees a certain level of knowledge on subjects tested by the written
and lab exams.
In my experience CCIE's tend to specialise in one (or a few) specific
area(s) after that. I think there's a danger of being Jack of all trades,
master of none otherwise.
It always amazes me that companies will pay a set fee for a CCIE even though
he may never have seen the equipment he's going to work on. The very fact
that he's a CCIE, shows a higher than average aptitude to fault finding, so
he may well succeed whatever, but there is no guarantee.
There are occasions where an unqualified engineer may have more knowledge of
a specific equipment than a CCIE and we've had occasions where the
specification has been CCIE plus one junior engineer. The junior engineer
has been the one doing a lot of the work because it's been something like
Radius/RSA, where the junior engineer has been specialising.
In my opinion, the people hiring the CCIE need to specify, for example,
thorough understanding of Unix, and experience with Tacacs, otherwise
they're only guaranteed subjects from the CCIE syllabus.
My two penneth anyway. Got to go, the plumber's just turned up to fix my
television????? :-)
Gaz
""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=13189&t=13151
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
