with the advent of the CCIE verification tool on CCO, it is now possible to check out these rumors and bits of misinformation that have crept into the lexicon.
http://tools.cisco.com/CCIE/Schedule_Lab/CCIEOnline?verify ( requires CCO login ) You do need to know the real first name and correct spelling of the last name. For example CCIE Verification Tool No, I'm sorry, Bruce Caslow is not CCIE number 3139. To receive a positive verification, you will need to enter in the CCIE's name exactly as it is in the CCIE database. For example, if the CCIE's first name is Dan, you may also want to try Daniel. Since there is a possibility that we have a different spelling of the person's name, please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] as a last resort but CCIE Verification Tool Yes, Andrew Caslow is CCIE number 3139. Certification is currently active. Still, this is one way to stop the liars out there who are claiming they are CCIE's - Chuck -- www.chuckslongroad.info still a work in progress, but on line for your enjoyment z ""Chuck Ryan"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Actually, I thought/read/heard that CCIE #1025 (aka the first CCIE) was/is > Jeff Buddemeier, technical lead for Cisco. > > This is the first time I ever heard the name Stewart Biggs mentioned as CCIE > #1025. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel Cotts" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 4:01 PM > Subject: RE: No longer 4 digits [7:52146] 2nd Terry Slattery quote [7:52159] > > > > In my previous post I quoted a post from Terry Slattery regarding the > first > > CCIEs. In it he did not recall the name of CCIE# 1025. In the quoted post > > below he does provide a name. > > snip > > The first CCIE, #1025, is/was Stewart Biggs. My understanding is that his > > certification has lapsed and he's off doing something else. I took the > test > > > > from him in August, 1993 and became the second CCIE, #1026. The lab > itself > > had > > a plaque outside the door labeling it as #1024 (a power of two - kind of > an > > inside joke for networking/compuer jocks). > > unsnip > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: MADMAN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 1:57 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: No longer 4 digits [7:52146] > > > > > > > > > CCIE 1040 sits next to me and I asked him if Imran (sp?) was his > > > proctor and it was. Imran designed the orgianal program and it's our > > > guess he was the proctor for the 1st CCIE. > > > > > > Imran was pretty tough, I remember talking to him at networkers in > > > Denver when the CCIE recert first came out and about 100 of > > > us took the > > > test and only 2 passed. He chuckled stating his intention was to make > > > it difficult so as to require studying. > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > Chuck's Long Road wrote: > > > > > > > > this topic of fascination for many often leads to a bit of > > > confusion as > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/625/ccie/ccie_program/ccie_pr > > > esent.html > > > > > > > > shows the number of CCIE's world wide as of 7/31/02 > > > > > > > > The first CCIE number issued was 1025. Over the years, > > > some have retired, > > > > some have neglected to recertify ( including Jeff Doyle, last time I > > > > looked ) > > > > > > > > So according to Cisco's numbers, on July 31 2002 there were > > > 8031 active > > > > CCIE's. > > > > > > > > As a sidebar, Terry Slattery, CCIE 1026, tells how he was > > > tested by CCIE > > > > 1025 ( sorry, I can't remember the name ) > > > > The theory was / remains that only CCIE's should test candidates. > > > > > > > > No one seems to know who tested #1025, nor the criteria used. > > > > > > > > Chuck Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=52173&t=52173 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
