Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
If you really want to make big money, go for MPLampS: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bala-mplamps-04.txt Very specialized, but big market, :-) Eric - Original Message - From: "nrf" To: Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 4:20 AM Subject: Re: A career in MPLS. [7:66609] > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Thank you so much for your enlightening reply!! > > > > And thank God I moved away from Novell to MS to Citrix and finally Cisco > > and now onto MPLS...And thank God "it is a very specialized and small > > market right now that is looking for MPLS experience"All the more > > better to develop skills in MPLS as every Tom, Dick and Harry is either > > just routing or switching ;- ) > > > > Looks like MPLS is the way to go!!! Come'on Sprint.Let's get on with > > the Show :-) > > Well, actually, I would temper my enthusiasm. Like you said, MPLS is indeed > a very small and specialized market, meaning there really aren't many jobs > because there are so few implementations. True, you might reply that there > are also few people who know MPLS. But almost all those MPLS are within the > large carriers where if you want to be the MPLS engineer, you can't just > know MPLS, you have to REALLY REALLY REALLY know it, with verifiable > experience and/or published papers to boot. Carriers aren't going to snap > you up just because you may have read a book or took a 1-week class. . > > > > > >From: """" >Reply-To: """" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: A > > career in MPLS. [7:66609] >Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 04:47:44 GMT > >Ah - > > MPLS. Yes there are several large carriers with MPLS >deployed or in the > > process of deploying it (equant, global >crossing...). Some on their core > > and some on their layer 2 networks >such as ATM (AT&T for example). > > Others backed away from it but >are now looking at it since it's a huge > > marketing beast that can't be >ignored (Sprint for example). > >Aside > > from ISP's some large enterprises are using it for things like >MPLS > > enabled VPN's. As to the market for someone that knows >MPLS - what I > > have seen is it's a very specialized and small market >right now that is > > looking for MPLS experience. Mostly due to it still >being relatively new > > in deployments and being relatively small in the >number of deployments. > > > >I do believe however after saying that - that it never hurts to have a > > >wide background of skills. Imagine if you specialized in Novell and > > >never moved into other areas for example. Novell is a great product >but > > the market for Novell pro's dried up a lot from the good ole days. >You > > would be much less marketable if you didn't also know other >things such > > as Microsoft or Routing or ... > >I could go into my opinions of the > > pros and cons of MPLS and where >I think it fits - but that's another > > boring story for later :) > > >www.ccie4u.com > > > >On 1 Apr 2003 at > > 15:47, nrf wrote: > > > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Hello group, How > > does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing MPLS > > > as part of > > your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our > > > network > > does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of the > > > > > Big Four Tier 1 SP's > > > > Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? > > > > > > >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > > > backbone?? > > > > > > Yeah, there are some. > > > > >I have just given myself a month or so > > break from my CCIE Lab > > > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me > > stupid on this) to study MPLS > > > for the CCIP and am thinking if I > > should pursue this subject just like I > > > did for BGP.know it > > inside out cold.and maybe consider a new > > > career/job in MPLS > > (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does > > > anyone know of > > how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of > > > implementation, > > popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? >;->Which > > > of the > > Big SP's or Enterprise networks have implemented MPLS? Has it been > > > > > worth the advantages that MP
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Thank you so much for your enlightening reply!! > > And thank God I moved away from Novell to MS to Citrix and finally Cisco > and now onto MPLS...And thank God "it is a very specialized and small > market right now that is looking for MPLS experience"All the more > better to develop skills in MPLS as every Tom, Dick and Harry is either > just routing or switching ;- ) > > Looks like MPLS is the way to go!!! Come'on Sprint.Let's get on with > the Show :-) Well, actually, I would temper my enthusiasm. Like you said, MPLS is indeed a very small and specialized market, meaning there really aren't many jobs because there are so few implementations. True, you might reply that there are also few people who know MPLS. But almost all those MPLS are within the large carriers where if you want to be the MPLS engineer, you can't just know MPLS, you have to REALLY REALLY REALLY know it, with verifiable experience and/or published papers to boot. Carriers aren't going to snap you up just because you may have read a book or took a 1-week class. . > > >From: """" >Reply-To: """" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: A > career in MPLS. [7:66609] >Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 04:47:44 GMT > >Ah - > MPLS. Yes there are several large carriers with MPLS >deployed or in the > process of deploying it (equant, global >crossing...). Some on their core > and some on their layer 2 networks >such as ATM (AT&T for example). > Others backed away from it but >are now looking at it since it's a huge > marketing beast that can't be >ignored (Sprint for example). > >Aside > from ISP's some large enterprises are using it for things like >MPLS > enabled VPN's. As to the market for someone that knows >MPLS - what I > have seen is it's a very specialized and small market >right now that is > looking for MPLS experience. Mostly due to it still >being relatively new > in deployments and being relatively small in the >number of deployments. > > >I do believe however after saying that - that it never hurts to have a > >wide background of skills. Imagine if you specialized in Novell and > >never moved into other areas for example. Novell is a great product >but > the market for Novell pro's dried up a lot from the good ole days. >You > would be much less marketable if you didn't also know other >things such > as Microsoft or Routing or ... > >I could go into my opinions of the > pros and cons of MPLS and where >I think it fits - but that's another > boring story for later :) > > >www.ccie4u.com > > > >On 1 Apr 2003 at > 15:47, nrf wrote: > > > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Hello group, How > does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing MPLS > > > as part of > your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our > > > network > does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of the > > > > Big Four Tier 1 SP's > > > > Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? > > > > > >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > > > backbone?? > > > > > Yeah, there are some. > > > > >I have just given myself a month or so > break from my CCIE Lab > > > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me > stupid on this) to study MPLS > > > for the CCIP and am thinking if I > should pursue this subject just like I > > > did for BGP.know it > inside out cold.and maybe consider a new > > > career/job in MPLS > (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does > > > anyone know of > how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of > > > implementation, > popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? >;->Which > > > of the > Big SP's or Enterprise networks have implemented MPLS? Has it been > > > > worth the advantages that MPLS proposes??Thank you.Sincerely,CN > > > > > The way I see it is this. MPLS is potentially powerful technology for it > > > can be used as a lingua-franca among a carrier's network and > transport >layer > > and also as a way to impose circuit-switching > discipline upon IP and > > therefore offer circuit-switching services > with a pure IP network. > > > > But MPLS is by no means a slam-dunk. > Certain carriers, most notably > > Sprint, have elected not to go down > the MPLS path because they believe the > > te
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
Cisco developers have, and continue to make, major contributions into what I hesitate to call MPLS. Some context may help here. First, one has to understand that protocol families like MPLS do not cleanly fit into the traditional model, and you can't force-fit them. When I say "traditional" model, however, I'm restricting that to the seven-story apartment house of ISO 7498. MPLS fits better with the revisions in the ISO document "Internal Organization of the Network Layer". Even beyond that, however, the IETF struggled with how to handle these and related protocols, and eventually set up the "sub-IP" directorate -- intelligent transmission systems below IP but far more complex than traditional data links. This isn't restricted to MPLS, but also covers IP over optical, IP over cable, generic switch management protocol, and daughter-of-MPLS, Generalized MPLS (GMPLS). Cisco educational materials have long overemphasized the forwarding part of MPLS and sort of assumed "here a miracle happens" regarding path setup. I remember trying to teach a beta class on MPLS on the ex-Stratacom 8850, turning off the projector, turning to the class of Cisco SE's, and going to the whiteboard to spend 45 minutes introducing how MPLS actually worked. In particular, the roles of MPLS signaling protocols such as basic LDP, RSVP-TE, and extended LDP were skimmed over, and the dependence of these protocols on conventional IP routing was minimized. Little attention also was given to the extremely rich traffic management and high availability features of MPLS, which I consider the main motivation for using it -- not forwarding performance improvements, which, at best, are minimal. Truly understanding the direction of these technologies works much better when you understand the generalization of GMPLS and see how it gives a common way of dealing with traditional technologies. Up to now, MPLS was packet/frame oriented. The GMPS extensions, however, allow you to use a largely common control framework for: packets/frames wavelengths (lambdas) in pure optical networking timeslots in TDM networking port identifiers when working with DACS and the like. I can't necessarily recommend any pure MPLS books, because I go directly to the IETF documents when I need to check something -- and am on the developer mailing lists. There is a significant amount about ISP applications of MPLS, however, in my book, _Building Service Provider Networks_ (Wiley, 2002, ISBN 0-471-09922-8), for which our own Annlee Hines was my peer reviewer, and Scott Bradner and Lyman Chapin were advisors. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=66698&t=66609 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
FWIW I have seen quite a few Cisco jobs recently on jobserve looking for people with MPLS skills specifically. -Original Message- From: nrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 April 2003 02:52 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: A career in MPLS. [7:66609] ""Henry D."" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > I don't mean to start any type of argument here, especially with > someone who obviously has more experience than I do. Yes, you've been > contributing to this study group many times. But also many times your > contributions are rather rethorical than practical and at the same > time you seem to draw attention to what your opinion is rather than to > give an educated and objective view backed by any type of real life > examples. First of all, given the subject matter (MPLS), it is most difficult to be giving out real-life examples. The fact is, MPLS is at this time not widely implemented, so therefore few examples abound. Second of all, it is essentially impossible for anybody to make a posting that is not necessarily colored with an opinion, particularly when they are discussing a subjective question. Questions like whether they should study MPLS or what they should do with their future are necessarily going to draw a wide range of opinions. If everybody is supposed to dogmatically answer 'yes' or 'no', then what's the point of even asking the question in the first place? The point is that subjective questions must necessarily elicit subjective answers. People are not robots. Everybody has to call it like they see it. You ask a subjective question, and people should be able to chime in with whatever they think. It's all about freedom of speech. Third of all, Cisconuts and I have taken the discussion offline, and while I don't want to speak for him, I would venture to say that he is quite happy with my responses. So if he's cool, then what exactly is your beef? Fourth of all, I resent the implication that my views are not educated. Be careful when you go around saying stuff like that. I seem to recall a story a few years ago how one particular guy harangued another guy about BGP, essentially saying that he knew nothing about how BGP really worked - only to find out later that the second guy was none other than a certain Tony Li, the father of BGP. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I'm Li or anywhere close to him. What I'm saying is that you should watch your fire. >So yes, I'm saying that some times you don't quite stick > to the subject at hand. I don't see how your view on Cisco's >curriculum in re to MPLS can be taken seriously without you putting >actual examples of how you came to that conclusion. Ok, fine, then let's review the CCIP curricula vis-a-vis MPLS, and in particular, let's review what exactly they teach. I know for a fact that they teach primarily LDP and gloss over RSVP-TE. Do you think this is wise? There is no evidence in the industry of a consensus that LDP will automatically win out over RSVP-TE. If you have such evidence, I would like to see it. I doubt that LDP will ever win out simply because you can't do TE with LDP unless you go with CR-LDP which Cisco does not have any plans to support at this time. TE is one of the more important features available within MPLS. The point I'm making is that neglecting RSVP-TE within an MPLS exam seems rather dubious. Second, the last 2-3 modules of that class deal specifically with l3vpn's, with nary a mention of any l2vpn technology whatsoever. Again, why such an emphasis on L3 but no discussion of L2? Much of the most exciting work in MPLSCON is about l2vpn's. Don't get me wrong, L3 is good to know, but a good MPLS class would also get into a discussion of l2. The point I'm making is this. If all you do is follow the official Cisco MPLS class, you will get a warped view of how real-world MPLS is. LDP is not the ultimate no-brainer signalling path for constructing LSP's and MPLS can do far more than just L3VPN's. I'm not telling you not to follow Cisco's curricula. What I'm saying is that you should supplement it with other readings and experience. >Even if the knowledge required for > achieving > Cisco's recognition in re to MPLS was not as advanced as one would >hope, shouldn't we look at positives of the whole process ? Again, it's not a matter of being advanced as it has to do with emphasis. I think that the coursework emphasizes some of the not-so-important things and does not discuss some of the more important things. Also, I don't think it's my job to 'play nice'. If things are not good, then I think people should say that they're not good. Why engage in diplomatic euphemisms? Does it really d
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
Oh! Boy!! What have I got myself into??? Sorry guys, I had NO intention at all to start any kind of flame which I have literally "despised" in the past I have been frequenting this groupstudy since 1998 and have learn a LOT!! And really advanced my career and ;-> Thank you for people like nrf who have always been there to answer and advise young newbies like us in this field Thank you nrf... So guys, let's refrain from turning this discussion into a 'flame' and get on with our quest for greater knowledge and skills!! Just wish that "old-timers" like Pamela and Laura were still around with us in this group!! Thank God for Priscilla, she is still there with us along with Howard and Chuck !! Thank you all. Sorry for anything that I might have invoked!! PEACE >From: "nrf" >Reply-To: "nrf" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: A career in MPLS. [7:66609] >Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 21:38:58 GMT > >""Henry D."" wrote in message >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Let me say up front, I don't have much experience in MPLS, I have > > only played with it in the lab and not all that extensively either. > > But CN is simply trying to get an idea of what to expect to go that road. > >I believe that was precisely what I answered. > > > Is "nrf" saying not to advance in this field by studying Cisco's way of > > emphasising MPLS ? > >What I said is that if you want to advance in that field, you will need >substantially more than what Cisco wants you to know about it. Read my post >again. > > >You know, we all have our doubts, he's brave enough > > to come to this group and ask questions. As far as L3VPN's, why not > > concentrate > > on that at least to start with. > >I never said not to learn L3VPN's. Read my post again. What I said is that >study of L3VPN's shouldn't be emphasized to the degree that Cisco seems to >emphasize it. > > > It's still one reason to do the MPLS thing. > > By just > > doing that he'll need to touch on many aspects of MPLS anyway. He will >still > > use either LDP or RSVP, he still will use the LSP establishment, he might >as > > well > > learn the TE options available for establishment of those LSP's. He'll >need > > to learn > > how to use the LSP's for pushing traffic over them. He'll learn what and >how > > the > > labels get pushed/popped. Then why not study it that way. He's not >advancing > > his > > MPLS skills, he might not have any yet. He's simply trying to see if he >will > > be able to utilize any of the skills he will have to learn to make it >worth > > it his while. > >No doubt all learning is good. Again, read my post again. I never said >that he shouldn't learn it. What I said is that he shouldn't necessarily >learn it "the Cisco way". > > > > > Well, maybe someone else with more experience in MPLS arena and someone >more > > objective can give a better insight as to whether there is a demand for > > these skills. > >Are you implying that I'm not objective - that I have some kind of agenda? > > > > > > > > > ""nrf"" wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Hello group, How does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing > > MPLS > > > > as part of your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our > > > > network does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of >the > > > > Big Four Tier 1 SP's > > > > > > Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? > > > > > > >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > > > > backbone?? > > > > > > Yeah, there are some. > > > > > > >I have just given myself a month or so break from my CCIE Lab > > > > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me stupid on this) to study MPLS > > > > for the CCIP and am thinking if I should pursue this subject just >like > > I > > > > did for BGP.know it inside out cold.and maybe consider a new > > > > career/job in MPLS (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does > > > > anyone know of how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of > > > > implementation, popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? > > ;->Which > > > > of the B
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
Thank you so much for your enlightening reply!! And thank God I moved away from Novell to MS to Citrix and finally Cisco and now onto MPLS...And thank God "it is a very specialized and small market right now that is looking for MPLS experience"All the more better to develop skills in MPLS as every Tom, Dick and Harry is either just routing or switching ;- ) Looks like MPLS is the way to go!!! Come'on Sprint.Let's get on with the Show :-) >From: """" >Reply-To: """" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: A career in MPLS. [7:66609] >Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 04:47:44 GMT > >Ah - MPLS. Yes there are several large carriers with MPLS >deployed or in the process of deploying it (equant, global >crossing...). Some on their core and some on their layer 2 networks >such as ATM (AT&T for example). Others backed away from it but >are now looking at it since it's a huge marketing beast that can't be >ignored (Sprint for example). > >Aside from ISP's some large enterprises are using it for things like >MPLS enabled VPN's. As to the market for someone that knows >MPLS - what I have seen is it's a very specialized and small market >right now that is looking for MPLS experience. Mostly due to it still >being relatively new in deployments and being relatively small in the >number of deployments. > >I do believe however after saying that - that it never hurts to have a >wide background of skills. Imagine if you specialized in Novell and >never moved into other areas for example. Novell is a great product >but the market for Novell pro's dried up a lot from the good ole days. >You would be much less marketable if you didn't also know other >things such as Microsoft or Routing or ... > >I could go into my opinions of the pros and cons of MPLS and where >I think it fits - but that's another boring story for later :) > > >www.ccie4u.com > > > >On 1 Apr 2003 at 15:47, nrf wrote: > > > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Hello group, How does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing MPLS > > > as part of your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our > > > network does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of the > > > Big Four Tier 1 SP's > > > > Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? > > > > >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > > > backbone?? > > > > Yeah, there are some. > > > > >I have just given myself a month or so break from my CCIE Lab > > > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me stupid on this) to study MPLS > > > for the CCIP and am thinking if I should pursue this subject just like I > > > did for BGP.know it inside out cold.and maybe consider a new > > > career/job in MPLS (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does > > > anyone know of how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of > > > implementation, popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? >;->Which > > > of the Big SP's or Enterprise networks have implemented MPLS? Has it been > > > worth the advantages that MPLS proposes??Thank you.Sincerely,CN > > > > The way I see it is this. MPLS is potentially powerful technology for it > > can be used as a lingua-franca among a carrier's network and transport >layer > > and also as a way to impose circuit-switching discipline upon IP and > > therefore offer circuit-switching services with a pure IP network. > > > > But MPLS is by no means a slam-dunk. Certain carriers, most notably > > Sprint, have elected not to go down the MPLS path because they believe the > > technology is immature (and they are correct) and also because they believe > > that they can garner the benefits of MPLS by other means (also correct). > > The point is that while MPLS offers great potential, it also presents > > problems, so implementing it is not a no-brainer. > > > > And furthermore, I don't particularly like the way that Cisco is pushing > > MPLS, particularly in its cert program. In my opinion, I think Cisco's >cert > > programs emphasize the least useful parts of MPLS while neglecting the more > > useful parts. For example, I don't understand why Cisco pushes LDP the way > > it does, for LDP merely builds LSP's that correspond to the route table, >but > > what's so useful about having LDP's that look like the route table? It is > > far more useful to build LSP's that differ from the route table, but the > > method
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
At 03:27 AM 4/2/2003 +, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: >I wonder if Cisco's MPLS class is just dated. It takes a long time to >develop and roll out a new class, especially if there's also a Cisco Press >book, exam, instructor materials, course binder, instructor training, beta >testing, etc. More than likely, Cisco chose to teach what a broad range of their gear could do. L2vpn doesn't fit this category, though I would expect that they have better luck with RSVP. >In the early days of MPLS, was there more emphasis on LDP than on RSVP-TE? I find the two technologies not competitive actually. I am just now building a network that runs LDP on a large number of devices for ease of provisioning, yet rides a TE core that is signalled by RSVP-TE. To me, these are two tools. However, I agree with nrf that glossing over RSVP will leave a bit of a hole in one's knowledge. I again expect that Cisco may have had wider platform support for LDP than they did for RSVP, but I'd have to check that out as I know they were an early supporter of RSVP, but may not have offered it beyond their 7500/12000 product lines. >Were MPLS L3 VPNs around before L2 VPNs? RFC2547bis, or BGP/MPLS VPNs, was the first widely inter operable vpn technology that used MPLS in the forwarding plane. It is thus also the most mature of the many variants and again more widely support across the product line. L2vpn (ptp) is still pretty fresh, particularly in the Cisco camp. Very few platforms have a wide range of support for the many encapsulations defined by the various martini specs. (Luca Martini from L3 has taken the lead on the many L2 over MPLS encap standards as well as defined a signalling mechanism via LDP) I expect the standard course gear doesn't have enough support for these technologies to make labs feasible. I should note that the L2vpn (if you want to call it that and most marketing types do) I've been discussing (though briefly) are the point to point type (Virtual Private Wire Services -VPWS). Think frame relay with ethernet in the last mile and 802.1q tags for DLCIs. There are also a set of standards dealing with point to multipoint delivery, usually known as Virtual Private Lan Services that are attracting a bunch of a attention. These specs made the provider network look like a single broadcast domain. I'm not convinced that is a good thing (don't know many providers using LANE for what its worth), but it certainly seems exciting to marketing and IETF types. Anyway, I suppose my overall point is that I fully agree with nrf, that to the curricula is not entirely representative of the more interesting bits of MPLS, however I expect the underlying reason is lack of platform/sw support to enable effective classroom lecture on the subjects. Pete >Maybe it's just a matter of "course development latency." Thanks for your >insights. > >Priscilla > > >nrf wrote: > > > > ""Henry D."" wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > I don't mean to start any type of argument here, especially > > with someone > > > who obviously has more experience than I do. Yes, you've been > > > contributing to this study group many times. But also many > > times > > > your contributions are rather rethorical than practical and > > at the same > > > time you seem to draw attention to what your opinion is > > rather than to > > > give an educated and objective view backed by any type of > > real life > > > examples. > > > > First of all, given the subject matter (MPLS), it is most > > difficult to be > > giving out real-life examples. The fact is, MPLS is at this > > time not widely > > implemented, so therefore few examples abound. > > > > Second of all, it is essentially impossible for anybody to make > > a posting > > that is not necessarily colored with an opinion, particularly > > when they are > > discussing a subjective question. Questions like whether they > > should study > > MPLS or what they should do with their future are necessarily > > going to draw > > a wide range of opinions. If everybody is supposed to > > dogmatically answer > > 'yes' or 'no', then what's the point of even asking the > > question in the > > first place? The point is that subjective questions must > > necessarily elicit > > subjective answers. People are not robots. Everybody has to > > call it like > > they see it. You ask a subjective question, and people should > > be able to > > chime in with whatever they think. It's all about freedom of > > speech. > > > > Third of all, Cisconuts and I have taken the discussion > > offline, and while I > > don't want to speak for him, I would venture to say that he is > > quite happy > > with my responses. So if he's cool, then what exactly is your > > beef? > > > > Fourth of all, I resent the implication that my views are not > > educated. Be > > careful when you go around saying stuff like that. I seem to > > recall a story > > a few years ago how one particular
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > I wonder if Cisco's MPLS class is just dated. It takes a long time to > develop and roll out a new class, especially if there's also a Cisco Press > book, exam, instructor materials, course binder, instructor training, beta > testing, etc. Actually, I think you are actually starting to get to the heart of the matter. I strongly suspect that latency has a lot to do with what's going on. > > In the early days of MPLS, was there more emphasis on LDP than on RSVP-TE? LDP (RFC3036) was standardized before the RSVP-TE extensions (RFC3209). More to the point, LDP is really an outgrowth of TDP, which was the basis for Cisco's old-school tag-switching. Therefore it is indeed true that LDP and its ancestors were around longer. Having said that, let me now say that traffic-engineering is a fundamental basis of modern MPLS implementations and one would be most remiss in dismissing its importance. > > Were MPLS L3 VPNs around before L2 VPNs? Again, yes, RFC2547 has been around for quite awhile now, despite numerous concerns about its implication of BGP scalability. L2VPN's are still in the draft stage. > > Maybe it's just a matter of "course development latency." Thanks for your > insights. I'm not faulting Cisco's educational team. They had to work with what was available at the time, and I understand that. What I'm saying is that it behooves the student to understand where the Cisco curricula is dated, and then adjust accordingly. This is similar to the BCMSN course material which also has problems with dated material. I mean, why emphasize MLS so much when all of Cisco's modern L3 switching gear uses CEF? > > Priscilla > > > nrf wrote: > > > > ""Henry D."" wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > I don't mean to start any type of argument here, especially > > with someone > > > who obviously has more experience than I do. Yes, you've been > > > contributing to this study group many times. But also many > > times > > > your contributions are rather rethorical than practical and > > at the same > > > time you seem to draw attention to what your opinion is > > rather than to > > > give an educated and objective view backed by any type of > > real life > > > examples. > > > > First of all, given the subject matter (MPLS), it is most > > difficult to be > > giving out real-life examples. The fact is, MPLS is at this > > time not widely > > implemented, so therefore few examples abound. > > > > Second of all, it is essentially impossible for anybody to make > > a posting > > that is not necessarily colored with an opinion, particularly > > when they are > > discussing a subjective question. Questions like whether they > > should study > > MPLS or what they should do with their future are necessarily > > going to draw > > a wide range of opinions. If everybody is supposed to > > dogmatically answer > > 'yes' or 'no', then what's the point of even asking the > > question in the > > first place? The point is that subjective questions must > > necessarily elicit > > subjective answers. People are not robots. Everybody has to > > call it like > > they see it. You ask a subjective question, and people should > > be able to > > chime in with whatever they think. It's all about freedom of > > speech. > > > > Third of all, Cisconuts and I have taken the discussion > > offline, and while I > > don't want to speak for him, I would venture to say that he is > > quite happy > > with my responses. So if he's cool, then what exactly is your > > beef? > > > > Fourth of all, I resent the implication that my views are not > > educated. Be > > careful when you go around saying stuff like that. I seem to > > recall a story > > a few years ago how one particular guy harangued another guy > > about BGP, > > essentially saying that he knew nothing about how BGP really > > worked - only > > to find out later that the second guy was none other than a > > certain Tony Li, > > the father of BGP. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying > > that I'm Li or > > anywhere close to him. What I'm saying is that you should > > watch your fire. > > > > >So yes, I'm saying that some times you don't quite stick > > > to the subject at hand. I don't see how your view on Cisco's > > curriculum > > > in re to MPLS can be taken seriously without you putting > > actual examples > > > of how you came to that conclusion. > > > > Ok, fine, then let's review the CCIP curricula vis-a-vis MPLS, > > and in > > particular, let's review what exactly they teach. I know for a > > fact that > > they teach primarily LDP and gloss over RSVP-TE. Do you think > > this is wise? > > There is no evidence in the industry of a consensus that LDP > > will > > automatically win out over RSVP-TE. If you have such evidence, > > I would like > > to see it. I doubt that LDP will ever win out simply because > > you can't do > > TE with LDP unless you go with CR-LDP which Cisco do
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
Ah - MPLS.Yes there are several large carriers with MPLS deployed or in the process of deploying it (equant, global crossing...). Some on their core and some on their layer 2 networks such as ATM (AT&T for example). Others backed away from it but are now looking at it since it's a huge marketing beast that can't be ignored (Sprint for example). Aside from ISP's some large enterprises are using it for things like MPLS enabled VPN's. As to the market for someone that knows MPLS - what I have seen is it's a very specialized and small market right now that is looking for MPLS experience. Mostly due to it still being relatively new in deployments and being relatively small in the number of deployments. I do believe however after saying that - that it never hurts to have a wide background of skills. Imagine if you specialized in Novell and never moved into other areas for example. Novell is a great product but the market for Novell pro's dried up a lot from the good ole days. You would be much less marketable if you didn't also know other things such as Microsoft or Routing or ... I could go into my opinions of the pros and cons of MPLS and where I think it fits - but that's another boring story for later :) www.ccie4u.com On 1 Apr 2003 at 15:47, nrf wrote: > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hello group, How does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing MPLS > > as part of your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our > > network does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of the > > Big Four Tier 1 SP's > > Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? > > >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > > backbone?? > > Yeah, there are some. > > >I have just given myself a month or so break from my CCIE Lab > > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me stupid on this) to study MPLS > > for the CCIP and am thinking if I should pursue this subject just like I > > did for BGP.know it inside out cold.and maybe consider a new > > career/job in MPLS (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does > > anyone know of how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of > > implementation, popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? ;->Which > > of the Big SP's or Enterprise networks have implemented MPLS? Has it been > > worth the advantages that MPLS proposes??Thank you.Sincerely,CN > > The way I see it is this. MPLS is potentially powerful technology for it > can be used as a lingua-franca among a carrier's network and transport layer > and also as a way to impose circuit-switching discipline upon IP and > therefore offer circuit-switching services with a pure IP network. > > But MPLS is by no means a slam-dunk. Certain carriers, most notably > Sprint, have elected not to go down the MPLS path because they believe the > technology is immature (and they are correct) and also because they believe > that they can garner the benefits of MPLS by other means (also correct). > The point is that while MPLS offers great potential, it also presents > problems, so implementing it is not a no-brainer. > > And furthermore, I don't particularly like the way that Cisco is pushing > MPLS, particularly in its cert program. In my opinion, I think Cisco's cert > programs emphasize the least useful parts of MPLS while neglecting the more > useful parts. For example, I don't understand why Cisco pushes LDP the way > it does, for LDP merely builds LSP's that correspond to the route table, but > what's so useful about having LDP's that look like the route table? It is > far more useful to build LSP's that differ from the route table, but the > methods of doing that are not really covered very much (if at all) in the > Cisco curricula. Also, I don't understand why Cisco places such an emphasis > on L3VPN's, as if L3VPNs were the only important service that MPLS enables. > L3VPN's are only one of the new services that you can enable, and in my > opinion, one of the less important ones. Far more important are the L2VPN > capabilities and the ability to unify IP, ATM, and optical into a single > management plane.The point I'm making is that if you merely study MPLS > according to the Cisco curricula, you really haven't learned much about it > that's actually useful. > > > > > > > > > Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=66657&t=66609 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
I'm trying to figure out if this truly interesting discussion is disguised as a flame ...or is it the other way around! Either way, I picked up some good insight about MPLS. Let the cyber flames continue! dj nrf wrote: > ""Henry D."" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I don't mean to start any type of argument here, especially with someone > > who obviously has more experience than I do. Yes, you've been > > contributing to this study group many times. But also many times > > your contributions are rather rethorical than practical and at the same > > time you seem to draw attention to what your opinion is rather than to > > give an educated and objective view backed by any type of real life > > examples. > > First of all, given the subject matter (MPLS), it is most difficult to be > giving out real-life examples. The fact is, MPLS is at this time not widely > implemented, so therefore few examples abound. > > Second of all, it is essentially impossible for anybody to make a posting > that is not necessarily colored with an opinion, particularly when they are > discussing a subjective question. Questions like whether they should study > MPLS or what they should do with their future are necessarily going to draw > a wide range of opinions. If everybody is supposed to dogmatically answer > 'yes' or 'no', then what's the point of even asking the question in the > first place? The point is that subjective questions must necessarily elicit > subjective answers. People are not robots. Everybody has to call it like > they see it. You ask a subjective question, and people should be able to > chime in with whatever they think. It's all about freedom of speech. > > Third of all, Cisconuts and I have taken the discussion offline, and while I > don't want to speak for him, I would venture to say that he is quite happy > with my responses. So if he's cool, then what exactly is your beef? > > Fourth of all, I resent the implication that my views are not educated. Be > careful when you go around saying stuff like that. I seem to recall a story > a few years ago how one particular guy harangued another guy about BGP, > essentially saying that he knew nothing about how BGP really worked - only > to find out later that the second guy was none other than a certain Tony Li, > the father of BGP. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I'm Li or > anywhere close to him. What I'm saying is that you should watch your fire. > > >So yes, I'm saying that some times you don't quite stick > > to the subject at hand. I don't see how your view on Cisco's curriculum > > in re to MPLS can be taken seriously without you putting actual examples > > of how you came to that conclusion. > > Ok, fine, then let's review the CCIP curricula vis-a-vis MPLS, and in > particular, let's review what exactly they teach. I know for a fact that > they teach primarily LDP and gloss over RSVP-TE. Do you think this is wise? > There is no evidence in the industry of a consensus that LDP will > automatically win out over RSVP-TE. If you have such evidence, I would like > to see it. I doubt that LDP will ever win out simply because you can't do > TE with LDP unless you go with CR-LDP which Cisco does not have any plans to > support at this time. TE is one of the more important features available > within MPLS. The point I'm making is that neglecting RSVP-TE within an MPLS > exam seems rather dubious. > > Second, the last 2-3 modules of that class deal specifically with l3vpn's, > with nary a mention of any l2vpn technology whatsoever. Again, why such an > emphasis on L3 but no discussion of L2? Much of the most exciting work in > MPLSCON is about l2vpn's. Don't get me wrong, L3 is good to know, but a > good MPLS class would also get into a discussion of l2. > > The point I'm making is this. If all you do is follow the official Cisco > MPLS class, you will get a warped view of how real-world MPLS is. LDP is > not the ultimate no-brainer signalling path for constructing LSP's and MPLS > can do far more than just L3VPN's. I'm not telling you not to follow > Cisco's curricula. What I'm saying is that you should supplement it with > other readings and experience. > > >Even if the knowledge required for > > achieving > > Cisco's recognition in re to MPLS was not as advanced as one would hope, > > shouldn't we look at positives of the whole process ? > > Again, it's not a matter of being advanced as it has to do with emphasis. I > think that the coursework emphasizes some of the not-so-important things and > does not discuss some of the more important things. > > Also, I don't think it's my job to 'play nice'. If things are not good, > then I think people should say that they're not good. Why engage in > diplomatic euphemisms? Does it really do anybody any good to dress things > up so that they look better than they really are? I'm not running a > marketing campaign. > > > There are still things > > to be le
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
I wonder if Cisco's MPLS class is just dated. It takes a long time to develop and roll out a new class, especially if there's also a Cisco Press book, exam, instructor materials, course binder, instructor training, beta testing, etc. In the early days of MPLS, was there more emphasis on LDP than on RSVP-TE? Were MPLS L3 VPNs around before L2 VPNs? Maybe it's just a matter of "course development latency." Thanks for your insights. Priscilla nrf wrote: > > ""Henry D."" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I don't mean to start any type of argument here, especially > with someone > > who obviously has more experience than I do. Yes, you've been > > contributing to this study group many times. But also many > times > > your contributions are rather rethorical than practical and > at the same > > time you seem to draw attention to what your opinion is > rather than to > > give an educated and objective view backed by any type of > real life > > examples. > > First of all, given the subject matter (MPLS), it is most > difficult to be > giving out real-life examples. The fact is, MPLS is at this > time not widely > implemented, so therefore few examples abound. > > Second of all, it is essentially impossible for anybody to make > a posting > that is not necessarily colored with an opinion, particularly > when they are > discussing a subjective question. Questions like whether they > should study > MPLS or what they should do with their future are necessarily > going to draw > a wide range of opinions. If everybody is supposed to > dogmatically answer > 'yes' or 'no', then what's the point of even asking the > question in the > first place? The point is that subjective questions must > necessarily elicit > subjective answers. People are not robots. Everybody has to > call it like > they see it. You ask a subjective question, and people should > be able to > chime in with whatever they think. It's all about freedom of > speech. > > Third of all, Cisconuts and I have taken the discussion > offline, and while I > don't want to speak for him, I would venture to say that he is > quite happy > with my responses. So if he's cool, then what exactly is your > beef? > > Fourth of all, I resent the implication that my views are not > educated. Be > careful when you go around saying stuff like that. I seem to > recall a story > a few years ago how one particular guy harangued another guy > about BGP, > essentially saying that he knew nothing about how BGP really > worked - only > to find out later that the second guy was none other than a > certain Tony Li, > the father of BGP. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying > that I'm Li or > anywhere close to him. What I'm saying is that you should > watch your fire. > > >So yes, I'm saying that some times you don't quite stick > > to the subject at hand. I don't see how your view on Cisco's > curriculum > > in re to MPLS can be taken seriously without you putting > actual examples > > of how you came to that conclusion. > > Ok, fine, then let's review the CCIP curricula vis-a-vis MPLS, > and in > particular, let's review what exactly they teach. I know for a > fact that > they teach primarily LDP and gloss over RSVP-TE. Do you think > this is wise? > There is no evidence in the industry of a consensus that LDP > will > automatically win out over RSVP-TE. If you have such evidence, > I would like > to see it. I doubt that LDP will ever win out simply because > you can't do > TE with LDP unless you go with CR-LDP which Cisco does not have > any plans to > support at this time. TE is one of the more important features > available > within MPLS. The point I'm making is that neglecting RSVP-TE > within an MPLS > exam seems rather dubious. > > Second, the last 2-3 modules of that class deal specifically > with l3vpn's, > with nary a mention of any l2vpn technology whatsoever. Again, > why such an > emphasis on L3 but no discussion of L2? Much of the most > exciting work in > MPLSCON is about l2vpn's. Don't get me wrong, L3 is good to > know, but a > good MPLS class would also get into a discussion of l2. > > The point I'm making is this. If all you do is follow the > official Cisco > MPLS class, you will get a warped view of how real-world MPLS > is. LDP is > not the ultimate no-brainer signalling path for constructing > LSP's and MPLS > can do far more than just L3VPN's. I'm not telling you not to > follow > Cisco's curricula. What I'm saying is that you should > supplement it with > other readings and experience. > > >Even if the knowledge required for > > achieving > > Cisco's recognition in re to MPLS was not as advanced as one > would hope, > > shouldn't we look at positives of the whole process ? > > Again, it's not a matter of being advanced as it has to do with > emphasis. I > think that the coursework emphasizes some of the > not-so-important things and > does not discuss some of the more important things. > > Also, I
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
""Henry D."" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > I don't mean to start any type of argument here, especially with someone > who obviously has more experience than I do. Yes, you've been > contributing to this study group many times. But also many times > your contributions are rather rethorical than practical and at the same > time you seem to draw attention to what your opinion is rather than to > give an educated and objective view backed by any type of real life > examples. First of all, given the subject matter (MPLS), it is most difficult to be giving out real-life examples. The fact is, MPLS is at this time not widely implemented, so therefore few examples abound. Second of all, it is essentially impossible for anybody to make a posting that is not necessarily colored with an opinion, particularly when they are discussing a subjective question. Questions like whether they should study MPLS or what they should do with their future are necessarily going to draw a wide range of opinions. If everybody is supposed to dogmatically answer 'yes' or 'no', then what's the point of even asking the question in the first place? The point is that subjective questions must necessarily elicit subjective answers. People are not robots. Everybody has to call it like they see it. You ask a subjective question, and people should be able to chime in with whatever they think. It's all about freedom of speech. Third of all, Cisconuts and I have taken the discussion offline, and while I don't want to speak for him, I would venture to say that he is quite happy with my responses. So if he's cool, then what exactly is your beef? Fourth of all, I resent the implication that my views are not educated. Be careful when you go around saying stuff like that. I seem to recall a story a few years ago how one particular guy harangued another guy about BGP, essentially saying that he knew nothing about how BGP really worked - only to find out later that the second guy was none other than a certain Tony Li, the father of BGP. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I'm Li or anywhere close to him. What I'm saying is that you should watch your fire. >So yes, I'm saying that some times you don't quite stick > to the subject at hand. I don't see how your view on Cisco's curriculum > in re to MPLS can be taken seriously without you putting actual examples > of how you came to that conclusion. Ok, fine, then let's review the CCIP curricula vis-a-vis MPLS, and in particular, let's review what exactly they teach. I know for a fact that they teach primarily LDP and gloss over RSVP-TE. Do you think this is wise? There is no evidence in the industry of a consensus that LDP will automatically win out over RSVP-TE. If you have such evidence, I would like to see it. I doubt that LDP will ever win out simply because you can't do TE with LDP unless you go with CR-LDP which Cisco does not have any plans to support at this time. TE is one of the more important features available within MPLS. The point I'm making is that neglecting RSVP-TE within an MPLS exam seems rather dubious. Second, the last 2-3 modules of that class deal specifically with l3vpn's, with nary a mention of any l2vpn technology whatsoever. Again, why such an emphasis on L3 but no discussion of L2? Much of the most exciting work in MPLSCON is about l2vpn's. Don't get me wrong, L3 is good to know, but a good MPLS class would also get into a discussion of l2. The point I'm making is this. If all you do is follow the official Cisco MPLS class, you will get a warped view of how real-world MPLS is. LDP is not the ultimate no-brainer signalling path for constructing LSP's and MPLS can do far more than just L3VPN's. I'm not telling you not to follow Cisco's curricula. What I'm saying is that you should supplement it with other readings and experience. >Even if the knowledge required for > achieving > Cisco's recognition in re to MPLS was not as advanced as one would hope, > shouldn't we look at positives of the whole process ? Again, it's not a matter of being advanced as it has to do with emphasis. I think that the coursework emphasizes some of the not-so-important things and does not discuss some of the more important things. Also, I don't think it's my job to 'play nice'. If things are not good, then I think people should say that they're not good. Why engage in diplomatic euphemisms? Does it really do anybody any good to dress things up so that they look better than they really are? I'm not running a marketing campaign. > There are still things > to be learnt, and emphasising them rather than the weaknesses would be a > better idea. You won't become an expert just by passing the test or taking a > trainig > class, but at the same token, you can still learn a lot while achieving > those CCXX > goals. > > Anyway, I'm sure there will be a good response coming, so let me be done > with this subject. I had an early start today and I'm
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
Henry D. wrote: > > I don't mean to start any type of argument here, especially > with someone > who obviously has more experience than I do. Yes, you've been > contributing to this study group many times. But also many times > your contributions are rather rethorical than practical and at > the same > time you seem to draw attention to what your opinion is rather > than to > give an educated and objective view backed by any type of real > life > examples. So yes, I'm saying that some times you don't quite > stick > to the subject at hand. I don't see how your view on Cisco's > curriculum > in re to MPLS can be taken seriously without you putting actual > examples > of how you came to that conclusion. I took it seriously. I bet a lot of other people did too. And he did give examples. I think you are being a bit harsh on him. It seems like there may be some history here, which may be an inter-personal and non-technical issue, perhaps best relegated to an offline discussion. I hope we keep a technical discussion going though, (despite my non-technical reply. :-) Priscilla > Even if the knowledge > required for > achieving > Cisco's recognition in re to MPLS was not as advanced as one > would hope, > shouldn't we look at positives of the whole process ? > There are > still things > to be learnt, and emphasising them rather than the weaknesses > would be a > better idea. You won't become an expert just by passing the > test or taking a > trainig > class, but at the same token, you can still learn a lot while > achieving > those CCXX > goals. > > Anyway, I'm sure there will be a good response coming, so let > me be done > with this subject. > I had an early start today and I'm tired now. > > Good night ! > > > ""nrf"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ""Henry D."" wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Let me say up front, I don't have much experience in MPLS, > I have > > > only played with it in the lab and not all that extensively > either. > > > But CN is simply trying to get an idea of what to expect to > go that > road. > > > > I believe that was precisely what I answered. > > > > > Is "nrf" saying not to advance in this field by studying > Cisco's way of > > > emphasising MPLS ? > > > > What I said is that if you want to advance in that field, you > will need > > substantially more than what Cisco wants you to know about > it. Read my > post > > again. > > > > >You know, we all have our doubts, he's brave enough > > > to come to this group and ask questions. As far as L3VPN's, > why not > > > concentrate > > > on that at least to start with. > > > > I never said not to learn L3VPN's. Read my post again. What > I said is > that > > study of L3VPN's shouldn't be emphasized to the degree that > Cisco seems to > > emphasize it. > > > > > It's still one reason to do the MPLS thing. > > > By just > > > doing that he'll need to touch on many aspects of MPLS > anyway. He will > > still > > > use either LDP or RSVP, he still will use the LSP > establishment, he > might > > as > > > well > > > learn the TE options available for establishment of those > LSP's. He'll > > need > > > to learn > > > how to use the LSP's for pushing traffic over them. He'll > learn what and > > how > > > the > > > labels get pushed/popped. Then why not study it that way. > He's not > > advancing > > > his > > > MPLS skills, he might not have any yet. He's simply trying > to see if he > > will > > > be able to utilize any of the skills he will have to learn > to make it > > worth > > > it his while. > > > > No doubt all learning is good. Again, read my post again. I > never said > > that he shouldn't learn it. What I said is that he shouldn't > necessarily > > learn it "the Cisco way". > > > > > > > > Well, maybe someone else with more experience in MPLS arena > and someone > > more > > > objective can give a better insight as to whether there is > a demand for > > > these skills. > > > > Are you implying that I'm not objective - that I have some > kind of agenda? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ""nrf"" wrote in message > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Hello group, How does one feel about a career in > MPLS...I mean doing > > > MPLS > > > > > as part of your core job day in and out.Is it worth > it? Since > our > > > > > network does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of > being one of > > the > > > > > Big Four Tier 1 SP's > > > > > > > > Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? > > > > > > > > >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > > > > > backbone?? > > > > > > > > Yeah, there are some. > > > > > > > > >I have just given myself a month or so break from my > CCIE Lab > > > > > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me stupid on > this) to study > MPLS > > > > > for the CCIP and am thinking if I should pursue this > subject just > > like > > > I > > > > > did for BGP.know it inside out cold.and m
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
I don't mean to start any type of argument here, especially with someone who obviously has more experience than I do. Yes, you've been contributing to this study group many times. But also many times your contributions are rather rethorical than practical and at the same time you seem to draw attention to what your opinion is rather than to give an educated and objective view backed by any type of real life examples. So yes, I'm saying that some times you don't quite stick to the subject at hand. I don't see how your view on Cisco's curriculum in re to MPLS can be taken seriously without you putting actual examples of how you came to that conclusion. Even if the knowledge required for achieving Cisco's recognition in re to MPLS was not as advanced as one would hope, shouldn't we look at positives of the whole process ? There are still things to be learnt, and emphasising them rather than the weaknesses would be a better idea. You won't become an expert just by passing the test or taking a trainig class, but at the same token, you can still learn a lot while achieving those CCXX goals. Anyway, I'm sure there will be a good response coming, so let me be done with this subject. I had an early start today and I'm tired now. Good night ! ""nrf"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ""Henry D."" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Let me say up front, I don't have much experience in MPLS, I have > > only played with it in the lab and not all that extensively either. > > But CN is simply trying to get an idea of what to expect to go that road. > > I believe that was precisely what I answered. > > > Is "nrf" saying not to advance in this field by studying Cisco's way of > > emphasising MPLS ? > > What I said is that if you want to advance in that field, you will need > substantially more than what Cisco wants you to know about it. Read my post > again. > > >You know, we all have our doubts, he's brave enough > > to come to this group and ask questions. As far as L3VPN's, why not > > concentrate > > on that at least to start with. > > I never said not to learn L3VPN's. Read my post again. What I said is that > study of L3VPN's shouldn't be emphasized to the degree that Cisco seems to > emphasize it. > > > It's still one reason to do the MPLS thing. > > By just > > doing that he'll need to touch on many aspects of MPLS anyway. He will > still > > use either LDP or RSVP, he still will use the LSP establishment, he might > as > > well > > learn the TE options available for establishment of those LSP's. He'll > need > > to learn > > how to use the LSP's for pushing traffic over them. He'll learn what and > how > > the > > labels get pushed/popped. Then why not study it that way. He's not > advancing > > his > > MPLS skills, he might not have any yet. He's simply trying to see if he > will > > be able to utilize any of the skills he will have to learn to make it > worth > > it his while. > > No doubt all learning is good. Again, read my post again. I never said > that he shouldn't learn it. What I said is that he shouldn't necessarily > learn it "the Cisco way". > > > > > Well, maybe someone else with more experience in MPLS arena and someone > more > > objective can give a better insight as to whether there is a demand for > > these skills. > > Are you implying that I'm not objective - that I have some kind of agenda? > > > > > > > > > ""nrf"" wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Hello group, How does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing > > MPLS > > > > as part of your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our > > > > network does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of > the > > > > Big Four Tier 1 SP's > > > > > > Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? > > > > > > >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > > > > backbone?? > > > > > > Yeah, there are some. > > > > > > >I have just given myself a month or so break from my CCIE Lab > > > > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me stupid on this) to study MPLS > > > > for the CCIP and am thinking if I should pursue this subject just > like > > I > > > > did for BGP.know it inside out cold.and maybe consider a new > > > > career/job in MPLS (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does > > > > anyone know of how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of > > > > implementation, popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? > > ;->Which > > > > of the Big SP's or Enterprise networks have implemented MPLS? Has it > > been > > > > worth the advantages that MPLS proposes??Thank you.Sincerely,CN > > > > > > The way I see it is this. MPLS is potentially powerful technology for > it > > > can be used as a lingua-franca among a carrier's network and transport > > layer > > > and also as a way to impose circuit-switching discipline upon IP and > > > therefore offer circuit-switching services with a pur
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
""Henry D."" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Let me say up front, I don't have much experience in MPLS, I have > only played with it in the lab and not all that extensively either. > But CN is simply trying to get an idea of what to expect to go that road. I believe that was precisely what I answered. > Is "nrf" saying not to advance in this field by studying Cisco's way of > emphasising MPLS ? What I said is that if you want to advance in that field, you will need substantially more than what Cisco wants you to know about it. Read my post again. >You know, we all have our doubts, he's brave enough > to come to this group and ask questions. As far as L3VPN's, why not > concentrate > on that at least to start with. I never said not to learn L3VPN's. Read my post again. What I said is that study of L3VPN's shouldn't be emphasized to the degree that Cisco seems to emphasize it. > It's still one reason to do the MPLS thing. > By just > doing that he'll need to touch on many aspects of MPLS anyway. He will still > use either LDP or RSVP, he still will use the LSP establishment, he might as > well > learn the TE options available for establishment of those LSP's. He'll need > to learn > how to use the LSP's for pushing traffic over them. He'll learn what and how > the > labels get pushed/popped. Then why not study it that way. He's not advancing > his > MPLS skills, he might not have any yet. He's simply trying to see if he will > be able to utilize any of the skills he will have to learn to make it worth > it his while. No doubt all learning is good. Again, read my post again. I never said that he shouldn't learn it. What I said is that he shouldn't necessarily learn it "the Cisco way". > > Well, maybe someone else with more experience in MPLS arena and someone more > objective can give a better insight as to whether there is a demand for > these skills. Are you implying that I'm not objective - that I have some kind of agenda? > > > > ""nrf"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Hello group, How does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing > MPLS > > > as part of your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our > > > network does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of the > > > Big Four Tier 1 SP's > > > > Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? > > > > >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > > > backbone?? > > > > Yeah, there are some. > > > > >I have just given myself a month or so break from my CCIE Lab > > > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me stupid on this) to study MPLS > > > for the CCIP and am thinking if I should pursue this subject just like > I > > > did for BGP.know it inside out cold.and maybe consider a new > > > career/job in MPLS (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does > > > anyone know of how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of > > > implementation, popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? > ;->Which > > > of the Big SP's or Enterprise networks have implemented MPLS? Has it > been > > > worth the advantages that MPLS proposes??Thank you.Sincerely,CN > > > > The way I see it is this. MPLS is potentially powerful technology for it > > can be used as a lingua-franca among a carrier's network and transport > layer > > and also as a way to impose circuit-switching discipline upon IP and > > therefore offer circuit-switching services with a pure IP network. > > > > But MPLS is by no means a slam-dunk. Certain carriers, most notably > > Sprint, have elected not to go down the MPLS path because they believe the > > technology is immature (and they are correct) and also because they > believe > > that they can garner the benefits of MPLS by other means (also correct). > > The point is that while MPLS offers great potential, it also presents > > problems, so implementing it is not a no-brainer. > > > > And furthermore, I don't particularly like the way that Cisco is pushing > > MPLS, particularly in its cert program. In my opinion, I think Cisco's > cert > > programs emphasize the least useful parts of MPLS while neglecting the > more > > useful parts. For example, I don't understand why Cisco pushes LDP the > way > > it does, for LDP merely builds LSP's that correspond to the route table, > but > > what's so useful about having LDP's that look like the route table? It is > > far more useful to build LSP's that differ from the route table, but the > > methods of doing that are not really covered very much (if at all) in the > > Cisco curricula. Also, I don't understand why Cisco places such an > emphasis > > on L3VPN's, as if L3VPNs were the only important service that MPLS > enables. > > L3VPN's are only one of the new services that you can enable, and in my > > opinion, one of the less important ones. Far more important are the L2VPN > > capabilities and the ability to unify IP, ATM, and optical into a s
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
Let me say up front, I don't have much experience in MPLS, I have only played with it in the lab and not all that extensively either. But CN is simply trying to get an idea of what to expect to go that road. Is "nrf" saying not to advance in this field by studying Cisco's way of emphasising MPLS ? You know, we all have our doubts, he's brave enough to come to this group and ask questions. As far as L3VPN's, why not concentrate on that at least to start with. It's still one reason to do the MPLS thing. By just doing that he'll need to touch on many aspects of MPLS anyway. He will still use either LDP or RSVP, he still will use the LSP establishment, he might as well learn the TE options available for establishment of those LSP's. He'll need to learn how to use the LSP's for pushing traffic over them. He'll learn what and how the labels get pushed/popped. Then why not study it that way. He's not advancing his MPLS skills, he might not have any yet. He's simply trying to see if he will be able to utilize any of the skills he will have to learn to make it worth it his while. Well, maybe someone else with more experience in MPLS arena and someone more objective can give a better insight as to whether there is a demand for these skills. ""nrf"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hello group, How does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing MPLS > > as part of your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our > > network does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of the > > Big Four Tier 1 SP's > > Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? > > >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > > backbone?? > > Yeah, there are some. > > >I have just given myself a month or so break from my CCIE Lab > > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me stupid on this) to study MPLS > > for the CCIP and am thinking if I should pursue this subject just like I > > did for BGP.know it inside out cold.and maybe consider a new > > career/job in MPLS (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does > > anyone know of how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of > > implementation, popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? ;->Which > > of the Big SP's or Enterprise networks have implemented MPLS? Has it been > > worth the advantages that MPLS proposes??Thank you.Sincerely,CN > > The way I see it is this. MPLS is potentially powerful technology for it > can be used as a lingua-franca among a carrier's network and transport layer > and also as a way to impose circuit-switching discipline upon IP and > therefore offer circuit-switching services with a pure IP network. > > But MPLS is by no means a slam-dunk. Certain carriers, most notably > Sprint, have elected not to go down the MPLS path because they believe the > technology is immature (and they are correct) and also because they believe > that they can garner the benefits of MPLS by other means (also correct). > The point is that while MPLS offers great potential, it also presents > problems, so implementing it is not a no-brainer. > > And furthermore, I don't particularly like the way that Cisco is pushing > MPLS, particularly in its cert program. In my opinion, I think Cisco's cert > programs emphasize the least useful parts of MPLS while neglecting the more > useful parts. For example, I don't understand why Cisco pushes LDP the way > it does, for LDP merely builds LSP's that correspond to the route table, but > what's so useful about having LDP's that look like the route table? It is > far more useful to build LSP's that differ from the route table, but the > methods of doing that are not really covered very much (if at all) in the > Cisco curricula. Also, I don't understand why Cisco places such an emphasis > on L3VPN's, as if L3VPNs were the only important service that MPLS enables. > L3VPN's are only one of the new services that you can enable, and in my > opinion, one of the less important ones. Far more important are the L2VPN > capabilities and the ability to unify IP, ATM, and optical into a single > management plane.The point I'm making is that if you merely study MPLS > according to the Cisco curricula, you really haven't learned much about it > that's actually useful. > > > > > > > > > Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=66628&t=66609 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
""Cisco Nuts"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Hello group, How does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing MPLS > as part of your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our > network does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of the > Big Four Tier 1 SP's Let me guess. Do you work for Sprint? >are there other SP's that use MPLS in their > backbone?? Yeah, there are some. >I have just given myself a month or so break from my CCIE Lab > Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me stupid on this) to study MPLS > for the CCIP and am thinking if I should pursue this subject just like I > did for BGP.know it inside out cold.and maybe consider a new > career/job in MPLS (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does > anyone know of how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of > implementation, popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? ;->Which > of the Big SP's or Enterprise networks have implemented MPLS? Has it been > worth the advantages that MPLS proposes??Thank you.Sincerely,CN The way I see it is this. MPLS is potentially powerful technology for it can be used as a lingua-franca among a carrier's network and transport layer and also as a way to impose circuit-switching discipline upon IP and therefore offer circuit-switching services with a pure IP network. But MPLS is by no means a slam-dunk. Certain carriers, most notably Sprint, have elected not to go down the MPLS path because they believe the technology is immature (and they are correct) and also because they believe that they can garner the benefits of MPLS by other means (also correct). The point is that while MPLS offers great potential, it also presents problems, so implementing it is not a no-brainer. And furthermore, I don't particularly like the way that Cisco is pushing MPLS, particularly in its cert program. In my opinion, I think Cisco's cert programs emphasize the least useful parts of MPLS while neglecting the more useful parts. For example, I don't understand why Cisco pushes LDP the way it does, for LDP merely builds LSP's that correspond to the route table, but what's so useful about having LDP's that look like the route table? It is far more useful to build LSP's that differ from the route table, but the methods of doing that are not really covered very much (if at all) in the Cisco curricula. Also, I don't understand why Cisco places such an emphasis on L3VPN's, as if L3VPNs were the only important service that MPLS enables. L3VPN's are only one of the new services that you can enable, and in my opinion, one of the less important ones. Far more important are the L2VPN capabilities and the ability to unify IP, ATM, and optical into a single management plane.The point I'm making is that if you merely study MPLS according to the Cisco curricula, you really haven't learned much about it that's actually useful. > > > > Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=66614&t=66609 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A career in MPLS..... [7:66609]
Hello group, How does one feel about a career in MPLS...I mean doing MPLS as part of your core job day in and out.Is it worth it? Since our network does not use MPLS (maybe never will) inspite of being one of the Big Four Tier 1 SP'sare there other SP's that use MPLS in their backbone?? I have just given myself a month or so break from my CCIE Lab Prep.(yeah!yeah! most would consider me stupid on this) to study MPLS for the CCIP and am thinking if I should pursue this subject just like I did for BGP.know it inside out cold.and maybe consider a new career/job in MPLS (obviously along with BGP, MBGP, MCast etc...) Does anyone know of how MPLS is viewed out there? I mean, in terms of implementation, popularity and last but not the least , $$$ ??? ;->Which of the Big SP's or Enterprise networks have implemented MPLS? Has it been worth the advantages that MPLS proposes??Thank you.Sincerely,CN Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=66609&t=66609 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
