Hands-on experience / Lab for Network+

seccie

Hi guys,

I'm studying for Network+ from the handbook by Glen Clarke (Osborne/McGrawHill). The book suggests quite often trying something by oneself (e.g. configuring Active Directory on MS WS 2003) with detailed description. I'm going to do it, because I'd like to pursue MCP and CCNA as well.

Now the question: is hands-on / home lab experience useful for Network+? Does it really help to pass the exam?

Thanks in advance

supertechCETma

seccie wrote:

is hands-on / home lab experience useful for Network+? Does it really help to pass the exam?

It might help in better understanding the concepts involved in a broad sense. There are some troubleshooting type scenario questions but they are mostly concerned with general connectivity. Still, it couldn't hurt.

Slowhand

As with any exam, having hands-on experience is always a benefit. If you've never touched the technologies you're being tested on, you can't really say you're qualified to hold the certification.

seccie

Slowhand,

have you seen the CISSP or CISA curriculum? You are physically not able to have experience with all the domains you are tested on.

Btw. what about guys who want to gain knowledge about new area? They do learn about something unknown, otherwise they won't get a job in the area.

I suppose it's a bit unjust. You can be qualified for the certification but have no experience yet. Btw. some certifications require you to prove x years of experience, and in such case your statement makes perfectly sense.

Smallguy

network + probably doesn't require any hands on experience but it will help when ur in the real world

obviously stuff experiementing with different fibre connectors isn't possialbe for most of us

but understanding basic network toppology would be nice to set up

even if you only go as far a building a small lan at home.

hands on experience will never hurt but it's not necessary for net+

Slowhand

seccie wrote:

Slowhand,

have you seen the CISSP or CISA curriculum? You are physically not able to have experience with all the domains you are tested on.

Btw. what about guys who want to gain knowledge about new area? They do learn about something unknown, otherwise they won't get a job in the area.

I suppose it's a bit unjust. You can be qualified for the certification but have no experience yet. Btw. some certifications require you to prove x years of experience, and in such case your statement makes perfectly sense.

I meant if you have zero hands-on experience. Meaning if you don't touch a router, switch, or ethernet cable, and you go for the Network+, you haven't really earned the cert rightfully. It'd be the same thing as saying "I'm a CISSP, but I've never secured a network, never written a security policy, or even been involved in a project that's security-related." No one expects you to have worked, professionally, with every single thing you're tested on, but you need to have some experience, even if it's only in your little lab-setup at home, or it ends up being all theory.

Orion82698

Honestly, you really don't need a lab for this test.

Get a great book (I used Sybex) and get some practice tests.

The ones on here, mcmcse, pagesbydave as well. I also used Trancender. The ones on Trancender were dead on. I think I passed with a 800-900 or something.. It was pretty easy.

Lots of questions on networking protocols, cables (speeds, connectors, lengths), and know the OSI model in and out (what happens at each layer, what protocols are supported at those layers).

You'll do fine. Trust me, it will be a cake walk compared to CISSP.

Orion82698

Slowhand wrote:

seccie wrote:

Slowhand,

have you seen the CISSP or CISA curriculum? You are physically not able to have experience with all the domains you are tested on.

Btw. what about guys who want to gain knowledge about new area? They do learn about something unknown, otherwise they won't get a job in the area.

I suppose it's a bit unjust. You can be qualified for the certification but have no experience yet. Btw. some certifications require you to prove x years of experience, and in such case your statement makes perfectly sense.

I meant if you have zero hands-on experience. Meaning if you don't touch a router, switch, or ethernet cable, and you go for the Network+, you haven't really earned the cert rightfully. It'd be the same thing as saying "I'm a CISSP, but I've never secured a network, never written a security policy, or even been involved in a project that's security-related." No one expects you to have worked, professionally, with every single thing you're tested on, but you need to have some experience, even if it's only in your little lab-setup at home, or it ends up being all theory.

I have to disagree with this. I don't know anyone that has been certified in anything to instantly remeber the stuff from their studying. Hell, I took my A+ and Net+ years ago, and I still have to use the /? switch in DOS every day for commands. Passing a certification (atleast most of them) means you can read a book, get a feel for the objectives, take some practice exams and pass a test.

I know many of my co-works who have a bunch of CompTIA and MS certs still turn to their books, or TechNet for answers. Saying that someone hasn't earned their cert rightfully because they've never touched a router or something is wrong IMO. Take most MS exams for example. They forcus a lot on RIS, RRAS, VPN's, and many other configurations that I never use in my field. Just because I've never worked with it, or set it up before, yet passed my test doesn't mean it wasn't earned.

Not fighting with ya, I just think if you've passed the test, you've earned it.

Slowhand

Again, I already said that you don't need to know every single detail of everything you studied. However, if you're an MCSE and you've never logged on to a Windows server, then you need to shelf that cert until you've got some hands-on experience with it. Using the help commands or help files is perfectly okay, no one is ever going to be able to remember every command, every tool, every little scrap of information they've ever seen. But yes, I still say that if you've never touched networking equipment, period, you have no business taking an exam that specifically tests you on that knowledge. Anyone can read a book and pass a test, it's another to represent yourself as a network tech and not be able to actually perform the work once you're out in the workplace.

seccie

Btw. I'm sure that it's possible to pass many certs legally (without cheating) by memorizing and in emergency case by educated guessing. It's not always the most time efficient method, but if you don't have access to the hardware...

Slowhand

seccie wrote:

Btw. I'm sure that it's possible to pass many certs legally (without cheating) by memorizing and in emergency case by educated guessing. It's not always the most time efficient method, but if you don't have access to the hardware...

That is a problem, but I still can't justify having a cert and having nothing to back it up. If (ISC)2 says you need in-depth experience in at least one of their domains, if Microsoft says you need to have at least installed and configured each of their server products, if CompTIA says you should get some physical experience with networking equipment, that's what you have to make sure you do as you're studying and learning, using books and study materials to help you solidify that hands-on work.

It might sound harsh, it might not be what you want to hear, but certifications are not just based on the test you pass, you're also measured by your ability to perform the work once you're certified. Cheating or memorizing **** isn't how you get a paper cert, you get a paper cert by taking a test and not being able to apply any of that knowledge in the real world, learning how to answer the test-questions instead of applying skills and knowledge to problems that need to be solved. This is the very reason why a lot of tests are moving towards sims and labs to do, instead of just answering multiple-choice questions.

sprkymrk

To the OP and the original question; the Net+ is not too tough. You can do it without a lab. You'll be better for the experience the more you do "hands-on" to go along with your book learning though, but it's not essential for passing.

We need to keep our balance in all these things. A guy that is smart and studies to pass a certification exam has earned that certification. This is different than someone who cheats. There is nothing wrong with passing entry level certs sans experience, that's how many people get started.

Education, certification and experience is the best combination.
Pick any two of the above and you'll get by.
Pick one and you are limited, but have potential.
****, lie about, or fake any of them and you will eventually embarrass yourself.

sprkymrk

Slowhand wrote:

but certifications are not just based on the test you pass, you're also measured by your ability to perform the work once you're certified.

Actually, they are only based on the test you pass. You're confusing a certification with someone's experience. They are not always the same thing. It would be nice if they were, but they're not. That's why many employers state that you must have x years experience and a certification. They know that certified does not always equal qualified.

Slowhand wrote:

Cheating or memorizing **** isn't how you get a paper cert, you get a paper cert by taking a test and not being able to apply any of that knowledge in the real world, learning how to answer the test-questions instead of applying skills and knowledge to problems that need to be solved.

Again I'll have to somewhat disagree. Don't read too much into a "cert". It's like a passing grade in a course in college, it's a great thing, but it's still only a measure of "knowing" vs. "doing". Even something like a lawyers bar exam only shows that he "knows", not that he can "do".

Slowhand wrote:

This is the very reason why a lot of tests are moving towards sims and labs to do, instead of just answering multiple-choice questions.

This is a mixed blessing. It will certainly make a certified individual more valuable and root out the paper tigers. On the other hand, folks just starting out are going to have a harder time getting into the industry. How did you get your start and would you have gotten where you are today if all exams were like the CCIE lab?

Slowhand

This is one of those situations where we can talk all day, back and forth, about what we think is right. I've given my opinion, I don't think learning to guess the right answers on a test makes you worth the cert if you don't have the knowledge to back it up. Using the college-class analogy, it's very similar to receiving an A in a woodworking class without ever having picked up a handtool. You passed the final exam, you can spell your name and you can know the difference between a hammer and a screwdriver, but did you ever actually attempt to build anything?

As for how I got my start, that's easy. I started out by building my own computer, then doing some computer troubleshooting for my friends and family when they needed help. I began playing around with home-based networking after a while, then I took some classes to learn more about it. It's only now, about five years later, that I've started looking at certifications with any serious intent to take them. I worked as a PC tech for CompUSA, so I got my A+. I started working helpdesk and then ended up doing systems engineering for an ISP, so I began my trek through the MCSA, Linux+, etc. And I'm going to continue on that journey as I work and go to school, attempting to earn

If the certs hadn't existed, or if there only had been CCIE-level credentials, I'd only have my experience to stand on. I'd just have to work, like people did back when Cisco only offered the CCIE, and earn it when I earned it. The fact that there are certs that can reflect my current level of knowledge and experience is fortunate for me, so I've begun working on them. I've also been lucky enough to have certs to help me set a bar, to have goals to shoot for. If the MCSE wasn't there, the CCNA wasn't there, and it was only MCA or CCIE, then that's where the bar would be.

tony0101

I don't have much experience either in anything, but what I know, I know. I gurantee that if you study hard, you will be successful. I have helped someone build a pc, Installed hardware, and job shadowed individuals in the field, but I cannot say that is enough. To get a job in IT, you must be certed. To get good experience, you need a job in IT. That is something that I can not understand. You will have enough experience just as long as you find a job in IT. Pass the cert, then get the experience.

ally_uk

I'd say to be honest building a home lab is a good idea to get to grips with networking in general and to improve your confidence in working with the technology

Hands on experience is much more valuable that having the ability to fire off memorized facts and figures

For example I have worked in the IT Sector for 3 years now I'm 21 years old and I cannot stress about the amount of times I have witnessed a technician who brags about there superior knowledge only to be defeated by the process of setting up and configuring a simple network device such as a switch or router

My style of working and learning is hands on if there is something I wish to learn or am having difficulty in learning then I will set aside some time and actually get hands on with the hardware until I am comfortable in all aspects of the technology.

Everybody has there different style of learning I have been reading the network+ material for the last year or so and have come to the conclusion that the actual material isn't really that challenging Your average person could wing the exam by heavily studying for 2 weeks or so

I have decided to Forget about the network+ exam keep the knowledge I have gained from reading the materials and put it to use when I start my CCNA in Jan 2007

For those who say yeah hey but you need N+ knowledge to complete CCNA that's just nonsense

in 40 weeks time I hopefully will have CCNA qualified in my sig

fingers crossed

netcom2000

IMO, I think that getting your hans dirty, is very useful along with studying net+, I installed 2003 server, and 2000 and XP clients in a home lab, and It realy helps to get experience, like loading AD, setting up Domain controller, and setting user accounts, DHCP scope etc, for example creating a DHCP server and address pool, allows you to fully learn DHCP protocol, than just reading about it, and when you pass net+, you will certainly have to know a great deal about the network you will be supporting in your career, so break and repair things, set up netbeui, protocol, and then play a LAN game across it, and you will notice the speed difference, coz it has hardly any overhead, but you will not be able to play multiplayer, as it is a non-routable protocol, but you knew that already, lol, then when you have finished the game then reset TCP/IP as top of the binding and there's some experience for you, diagnose servers on the Internet, using ping, traceroute and pathping, use nbtstat, ARP, netstat with all the differrent switches, if you use a router for broadband, access it and configure settings, and why not build a pc, and make it multihomed, with two NIC cards, and set that up as a router, there are many, many things you can do to get experience along with your cert, help family and friends with problems, and one last thing, dont just rely on setting your comps on the net, if they came with NIC's and not onboard LAN connections, take them out and re-install them, load the drivers, and so on.

Just my two penney's worth.

emmajoyce

As far as the network+ test, I took the cisco netacad for ccna, After the second quarter i took the net+. The only book i got was examcram2. It helped fill in some things. Also i downloaded some free study guides you can get off the net. And did alot of practice tests. The practice tests arent that hard, so you can do alot of them and not go crazy. Unlike doing alot of microsoft practice tests. cramsession has a good test engine you can download for free. Then you can buy more packets for it if you like. It had alot of questions and the explanation. Actually to me the net+ was sorta easy. The only thing was the apple questions. didnt really know anything about apple systems.
As far as certs, i agree that they dont mean you have experience. I guess it would be good if they did. But that would only hurt my case. Ive never had a IT job in my life. I graduate next semester. I tried for alot of certs so that i could stand out over the other 30 guys in my class when we apply for jobs. I DONT PRETEND to have experience. I wish i did. I didnt have to **** to get them either. Great school and tons of studying. Also no dates or a life. The employer can see your experience by looking at your resume. There should be two different sections, one for certs, one for experience. So in my case certs doesnt equal experience. well thats my thing for today. merry christmas people.