""Thomas"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have heard these stories for years now. They always start with ... I knew > a guy who knew a guy that was a CCIE and he didn't know this or he didn't > know that. We all know what knowledge, skills, dedication, focus, > perserverance it takes to pass the CCIE. > > When I see someone that tries to make themselves feel smarter or downplay > the importance/accomplishment of being a CCIE, because of 1 CCIE who did > not at that particular moment know something rather trivial, I just laugh. > There are no paper CCIEs and there will be none. As long as the integrity of > the test remains the way it is.
The notion of the 'paper-CCIE' is a tricky. Obviously every CCIE has to pass a lab exam, so in that sense they can't be 'paper'. (OK, the exception to this is the well-known problem of guys hiring ringers - basically hiring somebody to take the lab for them while using a fake identification and posing as you- but that's a whole 'nother problem). But on the other hand, there are indeed a significant number of CCIE's out there to which I would never trust a production network. They're not 'paper' because they did pass the lab, but they are basically "lab-CCIE's" because lab-work is the only thing they know. The 'lab-CCIE' (or perhaps the more pejorative term of 'lab-rat') is someone who has zero or minimal experience in a production environment. And let's not beat around the bush - a production network is totally different from a lab. One way to look at it is this. Let's say you're dying and you need an emergency surgery procedure. A doctor comes up to you and says that while he's never actually done the procedure before on a live-person, he's really really good at cutting up cadavers. Do you feel confident, or might you decide to choose another doctor who's actually done the procedure on a live person before? Be completely honest with yourself. Or, before you board an airplane, you hear that this is the first time the pilot has ever actually flown a plane, but he scores high whenever he plays Microsoft Flight Simulator. Are you still going to board the plane? The problem with CCIE's who don't know much is not necessarily the 'paper' aspect but rather the 'lab' aspect of it. Basically, the CCIE can no longer be taken as a guarantee that the guy has strong production experience, whereas in the old days, it was a pretty good guarantee. Let's face it - the CCIE developed a strong brand name in the early days because it was useful as a quick indicator of strong production network skills. Companies could spend less time ascertaining whether candidates had strong practical experience just by looking at a glance to see whether he had a CCIE or not. Now, they have to worry about whether the guy is a lab-rat or not - so they have to look at the guy's experience. Well, if they have to look at a guy's experience anyway, then that basically eliminates, from HR's perspective, the very reason why the CCIE was so valuable to them in the first place. One quick fix that I think Cisco should do for the program is something that the CISSP program does now - mandate X years of verifiable experience before you can attempt the lab. Or, if that seems too harsh, then perhaps Cisco can institute another program that sits on top of the CCIE (call it the CCIM or whatever) and have that program be not only hard, but also use verifiable experience as a pre-req. > > > ""2bie"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > It's not a fault of CCIE program .It's his mistake ;-) > > But, Did he receive his number ? Yes ? OK, surely he have a deep knowledge > > about OSPF, BPG, Redistribute, TCP/IP (except port 80), VoIP, Switching > > ..... I think it's enough, and I respect him. > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Ladrach, Daniel E." > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 1:57 AM > > Subject: Re: CCIE Vs. BS or MS degree [7:59481] > > > > > > > I just want to make one more comment. I worked with a CCIE candidate not > > to > > > long ago that did not know what port 80 was. Also, he took the lab and > did > > > fairly well. > > > > > > Daniel Ladrach > > > CCNA, CCNP > > > WorldCom Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=60531&t=59481 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
