On Jun 25, 7:08pm, "Chuck Larrieu" wrote:
}
} before I shut down for the evening, a few random thoughts on the CCIE Lab
} and NDA. Inspired by several posts here of late from persons asking about
} topology, IOS versions, or speaking of rumors about equipment changes.
}
} 1) It is unclear what really constitutes NDA. Caslow? The ECP1 class? NLI's
} practice labs? Caslow's new prep class? Cisco's own ASET lab? All of these
} could be considered violations of NDA in many ways, from topic content to
} lab topology. Cisco's own ASET program used real but "retired" CCIE labs.
It is very clear. Cisco's NDA only covers materials produced by
Cisco. That means Caslow, ECP1, NLI, etc. aren't covered. If those
people want protection, then they will have to produce their own NDA
agreement and have you sign it. If any of them break Cisco's NDA in
producing their material, then that is their problem, not yours. If
you can show that you got something from a source other then Cisco then
you are in the clear. As for the ASET program, I don't know. You
would have to ask Cisco if the NDA applies to it. This one ranks as a
maybe, which means that you better ask before revealing anything that
isn't on the public web site.
} 2) what is it Cisco really considers CCIE level skill? In the past, things
Presumably whatever is covered the info at
http://www.cisco.com/go/ccie/ .
} like DecNet, Apollo, and Vines were core topics. Cisco has recently dropped
} those, plus ATM LANE, presumably in response to market conditions. Which
} leads one to ask - why token ring? The only real world token ring project I
That is a very good question. Maybe it is because they thing it
is still relevant. In that case, one would have to wonder why the 3900
has been discontinued. Maybe because it ties in nicely with dlsw. Of
course, everything else that is even remotely related to SNA is gone
from the lab. Another reason might be because removing it would mean
replacing the token ring equipment in the lab with ethernet equipment
and revising the labs accordingly. That takes more planning and costs
more then simply dropping something that is strictly a matter of IOS
configurations. Of course, it would probably be a good thing since
having more ethernet switches would make it possible to have more
complex and realistic switching scenarios. A network would have to be
very small to have only one switch. Also, with only one switch
spanning tree pretty much drops out of the picture, and on larger
networks it is a major issue, so not having to deal with it on the CCIE
lab means that the lab lacks realism.
} have been involved with the past couple of years is ripping them out and
} replacing them with ethernet. The apologia that there are still some major
} token ring networks around is a bit lame. There are still some major DecNet
} networks around, I'm sure. Until very recently ( and maybe they still are
),
} a major utility company out this way was still running Vines. As was the
U.S
} Navy.
The B.C. provincial government used Vines quite heavily until
recently as well. I know very little about it. On the other hand, I
still have networks using Appletalk and IPX as well as IP (sometines
all three on the same wire).
} 3) Is the CCIE a forward looking certification or not? Based on what I am
} seeing in the marketplace, the advanced skill levels that one needs to meet
} demand center around VPN, VoIP, wireless, security, and the underlying
} infrastructure required to support these technologies. that means lots of
} QoS, switching, L2-L3 interaction, ATM, giga-whatever, etc.
I don't see much ATM. From what I see, ATM is goner. It's
benefits are being replaced by things like QoS and MPLS. I don't think
it keeps up with GigE much less 10GigE which is rapidly hitting the
market. Breaking packets up into cels is a huge overhead. With things
like GigE, you're better off just shipping the packet and being done
with it. The only people that seem interested in it are telcos and the
like that have already heavily invested in it. Advanced data people,
i.e. CANARIE (see http://www.canarie.ca/ ) aren't at all interested in
it.
What you mention is probably too much to cover in a one day lab.
Note that security (which includes VPN) has its own lab.
} I would purely love to see discussed good focused discussion on core
} competencies, core issues. But there is that awful specter of NDA that
hangs
} over all of our heads.
NDA certainly shouldn't cause problems with discussing core
competencies and issues. NDA prevents you from discussing exactly
what is on the lab. It doesn't prevent you from discussing things like
the intricate details of how OSPF or BGP behave in various situations.
You just can't say what situations are presented by the lab. Besides,
the idea is that you should be preparing for anything, not just what is
on the lab. Especially, since what is on the lab can change at any
time.
} I'm not sure if there is a real point to this message. Maybe what I want to
} say to all of those who keep asking about Lab equipment, Lab topology, Lab
} IOS versions, and the like, is that understanding of the core topics is the
} most important thing. If you have them down cold, the equipment and the
} topology will not matter.
This, of course, is the bottom line. I really find these types of
questions along with questions about the number of questions and the
passing score for the various written exams really annoying. The
information is useless and detracts from the quality of the list. If
you know your stuff, you will pass the exam, so people should
concentrate on learning their stuff.
} I'd like to comment on the rumor about changes in the equipment, but that
} damn NDA.....
If you don't receive the information from Cisco, then it isn't
covered by the NDA that you signed. However, until the information
appears at http://www.cisco.com/go/ccie/ it is nothing more then a
rumour and is there isn't much point in discussing it.
}-- End of excerpt from "Chuck Larrieu"
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=35191&t=34244
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
