Mike R wrote: » True the N+ test isn't cheap ($285)...
networker050184 wrote: » I don't see any reason for people with CCNA aspirations to get N+ certified unless it's a hard job requirement or something.
Hondabuff wrote: » A person who is looking to break into a network based roll with a CCNA cert will look very foolish when asked in an interview about, Cable lengths, Media Types, MDF vs IDF, Proper cabling, 568A vs 568B. Our last Network Engineer we hired, I was part of the hiring process and turned away over 40 people because they could not answer the basics about Networking. One of my 20 questions was structured like this and was a true story. Q1: One of my field techs was in MGM Grand in Las Vegas and was connecting the router up in the MDF and ran 1000' of UTP Cat6 "568A at the router and 568B at the controller" up to our Commscope Cellular Controller on the roof in an outdoor enclosure and we where getting packet loss and SNMP trap alarms that where not showing up in our NMS. It was a basic Centurylink DSL bridged modem connected to the router for the monitoring circuit. Where with your experience of networking would you start your trouble shooting and tell me logic behind your steps. 35 of the 40 candidates did not pass the question. Some where CCNA's and one was a CCIE written. The CCIE I think Photo shopped his Cert and had no number to prove it and couldn't verify his employment. For any potential candidate looking to get into Networking, CCNA only looks good on Paper. If you don't know general networking your not going to make it very far in interviews. One of the candidates on the closing questions stated that they studied up for BGP/OSPF and more advanced questions and I asked 20 of the basics. I hired a guy with CCNA Security that had the N+ and answered all 20 questions with logic and facts.
TechnicalJay wrote: » What would the correct answer be to this question?
networker050184 wrote: » You don't need to spend $300+ on a useless certification to know the answers to those questions. There is a difference between learning the basics and getting a certification. But yeah, definitely don't hire people based on what certification they have.
pinkiaiii wrote: » Hondabuff has a really good point here,for one i wish i started at networking+ or some compTIA certificate just to get the very basics that start ones foundation on networking,either that or gotten ccna material and topics in right order at least 3 months prior to even starting the course to get most basics in OSI/TCP and some simple protocols,subneting,ip classes.
pinkiaiii wrote: » And questions like above id say would be an easy grilling since ccna covers some basics about cable lengths and types,but many people skip easy questions and memorize commands and tests thus getting past ccna,but come real world scenario and you have someone guessing or doing textbook scenarios to answer questions such as above.
pinkiaiii wrote: » Thus dont know why many presume that ccna is like some holy grail to becoming engineer
NetworkNewb wrote: » The ICND1 covers all those... That is why experience is held over certifications... and it is the Company that gives the certification tests' fault for people skipping easy questions? Could you list another certification that gives a better ROI and helps someone on their way to getting a entry level networking position faster than?
volfkhat wrote: » Well for one, i'd start with a twisted-pair cable that is "568A" and "568B" on opposite ends. Never scene that in the field. lol Scratch that. a 1,000 foot twisted-pair cable??? riiiiiight :]
Networking_Student wrote: » Forgot to mention, the otherthing I'd look at,is the fact you have a cross over cable going to a device that shouldn't need a crossover, and instead should use a straight through unless it's ancient technology. And I am assuming you're talking about a front-end controller with its own dispatcher or a seperate dispatcher going to the router. Which by the way, if said controller has been around within the last three or so years, you should not be using a cross over cable at all. Because it most likely wont be capable of reworking the packets properly. Since we are talking about basics anyway.... You have two answers specifically to answer the question, with an additional question: 1. Wrong cable terminations, you need straight through if the controller has been produced in the last four years (most likely) 2. You need to replace the cable with fiber optic cable. 3. Are there repeaters every 100 meters on the copper run? Since it is router to controller and not model to model or an established ISP BGP set up and instead is a company internal WAN it is not out of the question to assuming the 1000 meters of cable is in fact a continuation of not one cable, but multiple cables with repeaters as is common across the largest factory in the world. (Boeing does this) So from the get go you already set up your interviewees for failure before you even ask the question, and penalize for given 1/2 of the answer but give full credit if they answer the other half but don't provide the information needed to fully analyze the question. As most of your candidates are assuming the company and its tech team, accounting, and management aren't retarded enough to spend the money, resources, and manpower to install a cable that long without ancillary devices as needed. Which would make it a situation they will never see on the job, unless you're implying it IS something they will see on the job. Then in that case the candidates should look for employment elsewhere because they want a job and work with professionals and not have to babysit or worry about having to babysit even their superiors who allowed such a situation to even be possible. That question negatively impacts the image of your company to applicants more than you probably realize.
Hondabuff wrote: » We never told any of them if they were right or wrong.
TechnicalJay wrote: » Hey Guys, I see a lot of people suggest studying for Net+ like you're going to be taking the exam but actually skipping it and then studying for ICND1. Does this make the most sense or is it a money issue?
theodoxa wrote: » The cable is too long. Ethernet over Unshielded Twisted Pair (Copper) is limited to 100 meters. This is covered in the books, but I don't think the exam covers it anymore. The CCNA used to (ca. 2001) cover all of the topics he mentioned (Cabling, MDF and IDF Design Considerations, etc...) or at least they were covered in the NetAcademy.