GroupStudy.com GroupStudy.com - A virtual community of network engineers
 Home  BookStore  StudyNotes  Links  Archives  StudyRooms  HelpWanted  Discounts  Login
Re: Off Topic - speculating on Lab equipment [7:48268] posted 07/08/2002
[Chronological Index] [Thread Index] [Top] [Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]


""Chuck""  wrote in message
news:200207080013.AAA24058@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> not so long as Cisco is making a bundle selling "CCIE" study books and
CCIE
> Lab slots. ;->

I doubt that this is a serious concern.  If this was Cisco's real
motivation, then why not just go all the way?  For example, have "one-hour"
lab exams.  Then they could sell many more lab slots per day than they do
now.  Or if selling training were the driving goal, then why doesn't Cisco
open its own CCIE bootcamp schools?  I swear if they did, all those other
bootcamp schools would lose all the business - because if you were going to
attend one, wouldn't you preferentially want to attend the one run by Cisco
itself?

I doubt that Cisco sees the CCIE program as a serious profit center.  The
profits made must be miniscule compared to the rest of its profit streams.
I think it sees the program as a way to maintain its status as a premier IT
solutions company.
>
> Besides, the driver here is the channel partner situation, not the end
user
> situation. As you recall, it was at the time stated that the primary
reason
> for moving to the one day lab was to help out their channel partners. The
> unforeseen consequence of the one day lab seems to have been that the lab
> backlog is as long as ever.
>
> The CISSP folks finally got wise to the certification phenomenon in their
> field as well. I seem to recall seeing some study materials in Borders
last
> time I was there. It is interesting that their response was to require
more
> verifiable experience, rather than more money for their test ;->
>
>
>
> ""John Kaberna""  wrote in message
> news:200207072224.WAA09298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > That is why the CCIE program should adopt a similar rule to the CISSP.
> You
> > must have 3 years (as of this January it's 4 years) of verifiable
> experience
> > in security to take the CISSP.  Cisco should require that candidates
have
> at
> > least 4 or 5 years of Cisco experience prior to qualifying for the lab.
> If
> > a person lies they are automatically forbidden from ever attempting the
> CCIE
> > again.  The lab rat problem would be for the most part solved.  You
might
> > have a few liars, but when those people blow up someone's network they
> could
> > be reported to Cisco so that they can investigate if the person lied
about
> > their experience.
> >
> > John Kaberna
> > CCIE #7146 (R/S, Security)
> >
> >
> > ""nrf""  wrote in message
> > news:200207072208.WAA07494@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > ""Chuck""  wrote in message
> > > news:200207071541.PAA18679@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > just did some looking around on CCO. checking the current state of
the
> > art
> > > > for IOS images for the 25xx routers we all know and love so dearly.
> > > >
> > > > it's looking like the images are getting so bloated that pretty soon
> > they
> > > > will exceed the physical limits of the router flash and dram.
> > > >
> > > > this could be disastrous to all us lab rats ;->
> > >
> > > I know this is going to sound so bad when I say this.  But maybe
that's
> > the
> > > point - to cut down on the number of lab-rats.
> > >
> > > Yeah yeah, I know a bunch of you are going to read that and
immediately
> > jump
> > > all over me.  You're going to say things like "People should be
allowed
> to
> > > learn what they want" and "Information wants to be free" and that kind
> of
> > > thing.
> > >
> > > All I have to say is this.  Learning how to be, say,  a doctor is not
> > free -
> > > it's unbelievably expensive. Not everybody who wants to be a doctor is
> > > allowed to be one.   You can't just decide that you want to learn
> surgery
> > > and then just expect somebody to give you a bunch of cadavers so you
can
> > > start cutting them up.   You can't just walk into a hospital and
demand
> > that
> > > somebody start teaching you medicine.  And this is true of just about
> any
> > > profession - law,  investment-banking, pharmacy, engineering,
> > pro-athlete,
> > > you name it.
> > >
> > > The fact is, all professions operate on the principle of exclusion.
> Yes,
> > I
> > > know that sounds rough, but that's life.  Not everybody who wants to
be
> a
> > > doctor gets to be a doctor.  Not everybody who wants to play
> pro-football
> > > actually gets to play pro football.   And, yes, not everybody who
wants
> to
> > > be a network guy (especially the senior network guy) actually gets to
be
> > the
> > > network guy.   Somewhere along the line, exclusion has to take place
for
> > > that profession to remain attractive.  If it's medicine we're talking
> > about,
> > > then the exclusion takes place in getting admitted to med school, and
> then
> > > the grueling years of medical training which has the effect of
excluding
> > > people who aren't mentally tough enough to make it.  If it's pro
sports,
> > > it's the harsh selectivity odds of being good enough to play
> > professionally.
> > > And everybody accepts this.   For example, you don't see any huge
outcry
> > for
> > > med schools to use open-admissions policies, where anybody who applies
> is
> > > automatically accepted.
> > >
> > > So the point is this.  If network engineering is to remain a viable
> > > profession, then exclusion has to take place somewhere.  You can
debate
> > how
> > > this exclusion is to take place.  Should it be done through the
lab-exam
> > > (which is what it was, say, in 1995)?  Should it be done through years
> of
> > > actual high-end practical  networking experience (which is what it was
> > > before the CCIE program, and what it is returning to, now that the
> lab-rat
> > > phenomena has sprung into being)?  Should it be some other way?  But,
> > > somehow and somewhere, it has to be done.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > of course, the images would be MUCH smaller if Cisco were to remove
> the
> > > code
> > > > for things like Apollo, Vines, DEC, IPX,  and IGRP...... :->
however,
> > it
> > > is
> > > > probably not very easy to remove code, and why would they bother?
> > > >
> > > > so at what point do all of us students get screwed -when the
required
> > > images
> > > > become so large that the 25xx is no longer viable? images capable of
> > > running
> > > > BGP, EIGRP, ISIS, RIP, and DLSw+ seem to require an enterprise
> version.
> > > some
> > > > of those images are pushing up over 16 megs now. see what I mean?
> > >
> > > See above.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > BTW - anyone checked the auction prices for 25xx equipment lately?
> Token
> > > > ring stuff is going for well below 200. Even the ethernet stuff -
> 2501's
> > > and
> > > > 2513's - seem to be going for less than 400. big change in the
buyer's
> > > favor
> > > > in the last year or so.




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=48303&t=48268
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to abuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx