GroupStudy.com GroupStudy.com - A virtual community of network engineers
 Home  BookStore  StudyNotes  Links  Archives  StudyRooms  HelpWanted  Discounts  Login
RE: NetMasterClass training posted 03/24/2004
[Chronological Index] [Thread Index] [Top] [Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]


I guess it is just a way to tell people to be modest and not call themselves
"experts". But what's your point ?

--RIchard

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Lee Donald [mailto:Lee.Donald@xxxxxxxxxx]
Enviado el: miircoles, 24 de marzo de 2004 9:30
Para: Richard Dumoulin; Howard C. Berkowitz; ccielab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: RE: NetMasterClass training


Who is your manager going to phone when his network goes down ?



-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
Richard Dumoulin
Sent: 23 March 2004 19:17
To: Howard C. Berkowitz; ccielab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: NetMasterClass training


My manager says there is not such a thing as "Experts" because once you have
dominated a technology a new one is already there  ...

Regards

--Richard

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:hcb@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Enviado el: martes, 23 de marzo de 2004 15:33
Para: ccielab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: RE: NetMasterClass training


At 7:20 AM +0000 3/23/04, Richard Dumoulin wrote:
>Not sure I like your ironical comment. Do u mean we should all be attending
>a 5-day only course to become experts ?
>In my opinion nothing replaces the day to day troubleshoot/research at
>work/lab,

Whether ironical or not, I don't think there is a consistent
definition of "expert" on this list. Obviously, one definition is to
be able to be certified as a CCIexpert.

Other ways of looking at "expertise" could include any or all of:
    --read and understand all of, say, the OSPF RFC
    --identify the true theory on why certain protocol designs were made.
      For example, fairly quick reading of OSPF and ISIS will show they
      encode many options differently. OSPF tends to use bit strings.
      ISIS tends to use type-length-value constructs.  Why was each approach
      chosen?
    --design and build an OSPF network of sufficient size and complexity
      as to stress various features.
    --explain how the features will work in a production network, and
      what their inherent advantages and limitations they carry. This
      point, incidentally, will exclude a LOT of the people who actually
      write router code -- they may be very good real-time programmers,
      but they are not necessarily adept at designing or troubleshooting
      more than one box in a test environment.
    --be able to state the requirements for a new protocol, or meaningfully
      critique a protocol proposal draft on an IETF link
    --be able to state some design choices for a new protocol. For example,
      BGP's paradigm isn't going to last forever. Even in the Internet
      Research Task Group, Routing Research subgroup, there isn't yet a
      consensus. This is getting into research rather than simple expertise

>-----Mensaje original-----
>De: Jason Graun [mailto:jgraun@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>Enviado el: martes, 23 de marzo de 2004 7:27
>Para: 'CHIONG, ERWIN R (ASI)'; ccielab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Asunto: RE: NetMasterClass training
>
>
>That is good, finally somebody gets it that you must first understand the
>technology and theory behind it before you can become a real expert.  That
>is a breath of fresh air around here.
>
>Jason
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>CHIONG, ERWIN R (ASI)
>Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 2:02 PM
>To: ccielab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: NetMasterClass training
>
>I just completed a very intensive 5-day course from NetMasterClass in
>preparation for the CCIE lab, and discovered more about this intriguing
>technology than just trying to obtain the certification. I finally realized
>the big difference between learning the technology and understanding the
>technology. I'm sure most of us can learn the technology by studying 24x7
>(and eventually pass the lab).  But, understanding the theory and
>applications behind the different protocols and integrating them together
is
>another story.
>
>The instructors and staff at NetMasterClass really know how to help build
>this understanding. At first, I was a bit apprehensive in paying for the
>course myself. But after experiencing how much they truly care about
>teaching how the technology works and helping you understand the theory and
>its applications (rather than just helping you pass the lab), I now know
>that their NMC2 course goes beyond the CCIE certification. For all the
>engineers who are really serious about this industry (not just for the
>certification), the NetMasterClass training is highly recommended. (and no,
>I am not affiliated with the company...just a student of this industry who
>wishes to share my experience)

_______________________________________________________________________
Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
http://shop.groupstudy.com

Subscription information may be found at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

_______________________________________________________________________
Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
http://shop.groupstudy.com

Subscription information may be found at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html


-----------------------------------------------------

You can find us at www.bacs.co.uk

*****************************************************
This communication is confidential and intended for
the exclusive use of the addressee only. You should
not disclose its contents to any other person.
If you are not the intended recipient please notify
the sender named above immediately.

BACS Limited, registered in England, No 1023742,
3 De Havilland Road, Edgware, Middlesex, HA8 5QA
*****************************************************