RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657]
My two cents - for what it's worth ... first, we all understand the purpose of this forum, but like in 3D conversations, sometimes the topics veer. Perhaps we need to redirect things back, but my God, folks - we're human beings, after all. Just because we're so intimately involved in machinery, they are, after all, just machines! And my own pet peeve, just because someone comments on something not appealing to you doesn't mean they have too much time on their hands - frankly, they seem to be more well-rounded than the one-trick ponies in the world. If you disagree with the man's politics, great - just say so in a non-aggressive manner and move on. Have a non-confrontational weekend, folks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Don Claybrook Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 5:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657] Sorry, Mr. Hall. Take a look at the order of operations. I was making the point that this was a technical forum that probably didn't need politics inserted. I was RESPONDING to someone who made the political remark in the first place. I'll discontinue this since the purpose is supposed to be all Cisco all the time here, but since you called me out by name, I thought I'd take a stab at defending my statement before bowing out. Thanks. Peace. Don Claybrook CCNP, CCDP, CSS1 (without much extra time on my hands) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeffrey W. Hall Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 4:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657] What?? Those of you who insist on detracting a good conversation with needless comments like that have to much time on your hands, Don. Why don't you and others like you stick to the topic and not be so tempted to provide such a short-sighted remark. Jeffrey W. Hall Network Administrator, MCSE, CCNA, SCSA -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Don Claybrook Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 6:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657] Well, if we're veering off into the realm of political commentary and putdown, I suppose it's ok to ask whether George W. Bush could spell TCP/IP "all by himself". - Original Message - From: "Brian Zeitz" To: Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 2:09 PM Subject: RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657] > Yea, it was Al Gore who invented TCP/IP and the internet, all by > himself. > > -Original Message- > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 4:30 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657] > > Vint Cerf wasn't commissioned. He was a graduate student at UCLA. BBN > set > up the infrastructure of the ARPANET and got the Interface Message > Processors (routers) and the 56-Kbps links up and running. To use the > ARPANET, universities had to write software for the devices that > connected > to the ARPANET. TCP/IP grew out of that effort. > > Priscilla > > At 03:47 PM 4/5/02, Rico Ortiz wrote: > >My understanding is Vint Cerf, was the creator of the TCP/IP protocols. > Not > >sure but was he not commissioned by DOD/BBN during the ARPAnet days.. > > > >-Original Message- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > >Steven A. Ridder > >Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 2:05 PM > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657] > > > > > >I am a technical reviewer for a book, and someone wrote that TCP/IP was > >written by the Depertment of Defense. I am confident that ARPAnet was > >commissiond by the DoD in the 60's to BBN, and maybe TCP/IP was derived > from > >these early protocls, but to say the the DoD, or BBN or anyone other > than > >the Internet community wrote TCP and IP would be incorrect, right? I > seem > >to remember that IP was used in ArpaNet, but not TCP. I thought TCP > was > >written in various universities. I could even look up the couple (who > used > >to work at Cisco) who wrote it. > > > >-- > > > >RFC 1149 Compliant. > >Get in my head: > >http://sar.dynu.com > > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40656&t=39657 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328]
Great email, x -- if I was in a position to hire someone right now, you'd be at the top of my list. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of x Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 9:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328] I guess I wasn't completely clear in my original post. I am not a recent CCNA graduate with no experience in the field or a "street vendor"(this one is pretty funny to me living in New York). I am looking for Cisco career advice. Judging from the responses, I am not the only person who wants to make the leap from a job that is part time Cisco to full time Cisco. I have been in the IT field for 6 years and moved from desktop, to Novell, to NT, to Unix. I passed the CNE and got a junior Novell position. I passed the MCSE and then got a junior position. I worked on learning OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris, and Redhat Linux and got a NT/Unix job that included Cisco switches, a vpn concentrator, a PIX and a PIX to PIX vpn. I also passed the CCDA, CCNA, CCNP, and the CCIE written. I am planning on taking the CCDP and CSS-1 before finishing my CCIE. I have my own home lab complete with 6 routers and a Catalyst 5000. I would like to get more hands on Cisco experience in the real world before I try the CCIE Lab. I am in a position now where I am certified to a degree, have some experience, and a home lab. Usually at this point I can land a junior position and get real experience to move into a senior position. It just seems like a huge gap in the job market. All the job ads from Hotjobs, monster, and headhunter are looking for Cisco people are asking for CCIE's or people with 5+ years experience. These people had to get that experience somewhere and there must be Cisco positions that don't require a CCIE. I am going to go out on a limb assuming there are company's with 10 to 20 routers or resellers that need CCNPs or companies that can't afford to hire a CCIE, but need Cisco help. Where are these jobs posted? Do I need to know a secret handshake? hehe If you are a CCIE or have 5+ years Cisco experience how did you get it(Priscilla Openhiemer might have spelled that wrong or any other CCIEs or highly experienced people on the list)? I would like to hear your story of how you "made it." Maybe it can give me an idea of what I need to do. This brings me to why I want to be a CCIE. I first heard the CCIE was the most difficult certification to achieve when I was just starting in networking. I was told the CCIE Lab is almost impossible and there were only about 5,000 CCIEs compared to 80,000 MCSEs or CNEs. I was hooked. Its not about the money, because anyone can make plenty of money just doing Microsoft, Novell and/or Unix with alot less effort. It isn't because Cisco is "hot." Its because this is the biggest challenge in networking and when I do something I want to be the best. -Original Message- From: Logan, Harold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328] I don't mean to offend anyone, but the job market doesn't owe anyone a job, and I include myself with that statement. Right now a CCNA or NP with little or no experience is going to have as much luck selling that skillset as a street vendor selling "September 11th - We will not forget" stickers. There was a heavy demand for them 6 months ago, but there's hardly any demand for them now. If you don't think that analogy applies to IT, then there are some COBOL programmers I'd like to introduce you to. Face it, there is little if any demand forpeople with just a CCNA, or even an NP without much work experience. I feel bad for you, I really do. So adapt; look to see what there is a demand for, and more importantly what there will be a demand for, and work towards fitting that mold. Sorry if I sound bitter, but here's my perspective - every year my school kicks out at least a dozen CCNA's, and that's considered low. Original Message- From: Lomker, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wed 4/3/2002 2:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328] > How do I get a job that works with Cisco products, > without alot of experience or a CCIE? No kidding and good luck. Even when the economy was good I couldn't find a job. If you have a BSEE your odds are a lot better, but my business degree didn't get me anywhere. My current position is 75% NT and 25% Cisco. You might have to find a job like mine at a company that will give you some exposure to the Cisco equipment. [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40497&t=40328 -
RE: what does 0 in 0Xnnnn mean? [7:40372]
Not sure if this is a satisfactory answer, but I believe the convention harkens back to Kernighan and Ritchie, the inventors of the C programming language. 0x was an indicator for a hex value; 0 alone was an indicator for octal. I have no clue why 0d was used for octal in Cisco-ese. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Neiberger Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: what does 0 in 0X mean? [7:40372] I think the question is what does the '0' specifically refer to? We know that 0x indicates hex, but I'm guessing he's asking why we don't simply use x instead of 0x, or d for octal instead of 0d. Speaking of that, why is octal 0d? I'd think that 'd' should mean decimal. John >>> "Persio Pucci" 4/3/02 2:16:55 PM >>> That indicates that the notation in use is hexadecimal for the registry number i.e. 0x2102 set the registry bits to 110010 Persio - Original Message - From: "Jeffrey Reed" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 5:12 PM Subject: what does 0 in 0X mean? [7:40372] > Here s a good question an intern asked me and I couldn t even make-up an > answer > > I was working with him showing how to recover a password and we were > changing the confreg setting. He asked what the leading 0 before the X > represented. I m not sure any help from the group is appreciated. > > Jeffrey Reed > Classic Networking, Inc. > Cell 717-805-5536 > Office 717-737-8586 > FAX 717-737-0290 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40402&t=40372 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MPLS White Paper Announcement [7:40207]
Interesting. Yesterday, I just copied the HTML and changed the charset to US-ASCII and voila - when I browsed it, I could read it. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Semion Lisyansky Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MPLS White Paper Announcement [7:40207] Hi List, If you would read this study guide to it's end, you could find there nice ~10 lines perl script which explains what the guy actually did - he just shifted ascii of each english letter 128 chars. Have I mentioned that my mother tongue is Russian? -- Semion Lisyansky mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >David Wolsefer >Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 10:21 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: MPLS White Paper Announcement [7:40035] > > >Galina Pildush is publishing an MPLS white paper today on >www.certificationzone.com. You better hurry though because it will only be >available free for today only. This should be an excellent source for those >studying for the C&S exam. As a CCIE and JNCIE, Galina knows MPLS well. > >Regards, > >David Wolsefer _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40212&t=40207 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Focus on RFCs [7:40046]
Well-described comments on your part, may I add. Perhaps a shade off the mark, though. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Neiberger Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Focus on RFCs [7:40046] I think that we don't often enough point people toward reading RFCs during their studies. Some people, like Steven Ridder (as evidenced by his email sig) do take the time to read through RFCs to make sure they really understand the technology. On that note, here is a link to one of the more recent RFCs that I find particularly enlightening: ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3251.txt Very interesting reading, I must say. Regards, John Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40062&t=40046 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
