CCIE changes

Turgon

SysAdmin4066 wrote: »

Which is why I said the 6500 is not appropriate for the R&S so to speak. I I mean, I have never HAD to work with one, in 10 years in the field. In my exeperience it's not a common enterprise, or small to medium size device. 35xxs on the other hand are very common. That could just be my experiences though. Good for those who have worked with, or work with the devices on a daily, but for those who havent or dont, that will be problematic.

I have worked with them personally. It's just a box, but if you work in DC environments that are heavy on these things there are *LOTS* of considerations there. Dual Sup or not is one issue but there are certainly many others. Much depends on what you are using these things for. If you look at the blogs of folks who work with these things on a very large scale you will see what I mean. The issues are really defined by working with them in the field as opposed to anything you will learn on a study track. To what extent that sort of thing invades the CCIE knowledge base criteria only time will tell. The non 6000 series CCIE's will tell you its only a box. The 6000 heavy CCIE candidates and CCIEs will tell you there's more to it than that. It really depends on what you have to get a 6000 to do.

networker050184

Personally, I think anyone who wants to be considered an "Expert" should have knowledge on chassis switches. They are a huge part of Cisco's portfolio of products. IMO the lab should test on basic SUP redundancy set ups and throw a couple different line cards at you with different capabilities to get you thinking a bit. Maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones who get to play with these things so it doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

Turgon

networker050184 wrote: »

Personally, I think anyone who wants to be considered an "Expert" should have knowledge on chassis switches. They are a huge part of Cisco's portfolio of products. IMO the lab should test on basic SUP redundancy set ups and throw a couple different line cards at you with different capabilities to get you thinking a bit. Maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones who get to play with these things so it doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

I think thats fair comment in some sense. I have worked on them and when I did the switching exam back in the day in 2001 things came up on the test, although I didnt work on them at that time.

There are some *issues* that a qualified Cisco pro will be expected to know something about in regards to these beasts. Without field experience with them or at least tested theoretical background you *will* suffer if you are put in front of lots of them.

So I do think it's a gap that Cisco needs to address a little bit to help its fledgling engineers! Not everyone works with these things!

We *are* lucky though, we got to play with them a bit. Kinda expensive for the house and noisy!

keenon

overall if these do come into play. the cost alone with kill most vendors even purchasing grey market 15k per sup, chassis with power 2k , line cards 2k depending on whats tested. redundancy setup means this will be times 2. so testing sup redundancy, chassis redundancy and etc features this will be expensive as hell.

mostly think of it like this move quick, fast and effectively! time is of the essence.. stop complaining

APA

yes I had a chuckle when I received the learning network email regarding the waiver....... think its pointless coming up with QeQs then deciding to waive them for those that have a company to foot the 360 bill or have the cash themselves. one test for all!

EMcCaleb

networker050184 wrote: »

Personally, I think anyone who wants to be considered an "Expert" should have knowledge on chassis switches. They are a huge part of Cisco's portfolio of products. IMO the lab should test on basic SUP redundancy set ups and throw a couple different line cards at you with different capabilities to get you thinking a bit. Maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones who get to play with these things so it doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

I can't agree with this. I believe that view is myopic.

Personally, I like to believe what makes you an expert isn't what you know about Cisco specific hardware. I think it's the knowledge of protocols and standards that all venders use. A CCIE is largely respected for their ability to work/understand not only Cisco equipment/networks, but to understand broadly what's occurring from a more vender agnostic approach.

Many CCIE's and candidates are driven to get a CCIE not because it identifies us as Cisco Engineers but more significantly, competent Network Engineers. Cisco offers a plethora of sales certifications to affirm one's knowledge of Cisco hardware.

Simply my 2cents….

Forsaken_GA

Turgon wrote: »

The non 6000 series CCIE's will tell you its only a box. The 6000 heavy CCIE candidates and CCIEs will tell you there's more to it than that. It really depends on what you have to get a 6000 to do.

The problem with the chassis based switches, and with the 6500's in particular, is that they're total hack jobs. They were never intended to handle the duties they currently do, but Cisco just keeps building solutions around them. I've seen 6500's deployed as core routers, border routers, distribution switches, and even end of rack aggregation switches. Given how versatile the platform is, I don't think it'd be unreasonable for Cisco to test on it. After all, I'd think that an R&S CCIE who couldn't explain the difference between and MSFC and a PFC (let alone what they are) is a sad thing, or how the switching fabric works.

nullrouter

6500s are not scary. Everyone chill out, it's just a switch with massive port aggregation and backplane speed. Unless there's 6500 specific modules being added, with features you don't get in the lower end switches, which I'd doubt, no need to worry.

Yes I work with a heap of them

jason_lunde

Ron Burgundy: (on the ccie changes thread) Boy, that escalated quickly. I mean, that really got out of hand fast!
Champ Kind: It jumped up a notch.
Ron Burgundy: [surprised] It did, didn't it?

lol, just trying to lighten the mood

networker050184

EMcCaleb wrote: »

I can't agree with this. I believe that view is myopic.

Personally, I like to believe what makes you an expert isn't what you know about Cisco specific hardware. I think it's the knowledge of protocols and standards that all venders use. A CCIE is largely respected for their ability to work/understand not only Cisco equipment/networks, but to understand broadly what's occurring from a more vender agnostic approach.

Many CCIE's and candidates are driven to get a CCIE not because it identifies us as Cisco Engineers but more significantly, competent Network Engineers. Cisco offers a plethora of sales certifications to affirm one's knowledge of Cisco hardware.

Simply my 2cents….

I can see where you are coming from. It is a highly regarded certification in networking in general, not just for Cisco networks. However it is a Cisco certification and not a vendor neutral cert. If it were vendor neutral I'd share your view.

CiskHo

networker050184 wrote: »

I can see where you are coming from. It is a highly regarded certification in networking in general, not just for Cisco networks. However it is a Cisco certification and not a vendor neutral cert. If it were vendor neutral I'd share your view.

My thoughts exactly.

SysAdmin4066

EMcCaleb wrote: »

I can't agree with this. I believe that view is myopic.

Personally, I like to believe what makes you an expert isn't what you know about Cisco specific hardware. I think it's the knowledge of protocols and standards that all venders use. A CCIE is largely respected for their ability to work/understand not only Cisco equipment/networks, but to understand broadly what's occurring from a more vender agnostic approach.

Many CCIE's and candidates are driven to get a CCIE not because it identifies us as Cisco Engineers but more significantly, competent Network Engineers. Cisco offers a plethora of sales certifications to affirm one's knowledge of Cisco hardware.

Simply my 2cents….

I agree, I see the CCIE R&S as more of an expert in R&S techniques and procedures. The specific boxes, hardware, devices, etc, should not be as important as the fundamentals of routing and switching and the outlying suppport of those fundamentals, like security, and optimization. I work with chassis routers/switches, just not Cisco. They are entirely too expensive, and so we use a different vendor. A good number of shops dont have chassis switches/routers at all. I think the current level of equipment, while still expensive, allows for most candidates to purchase either similar hardware or rent rack time. Of course, this is a very selective cert and I want it to stay that way. That's why I am working on obtaining it myself, but there is a such thing as too exclusive. Obviously this is just my opinion and not a very valid one as I dont have a number yet. I'll keep going until I absolutely cant go any further. But I hope I reach the finish line, i've invested a lot of money so far and plan on investing a lot more.

And the OEQ waiver, it's not fair, point blank. One test for all is what I think should be the case. While I'm not worried about the OEQs, I shouldnt have to be if there is a group of people who can essentially buy a waiver. How is that NOT cheating in itself?

EMcCaleb

networker050184 wrote: »

I can see where you are coming from. It is a highly regarded certification in networking in general, not just for Cisco networks. However it is a Cisco certification and not a vendor neutral cert. If it were vendor neutral I'd share your view.

Of course I'm not speaking of it being vender neutral. For starters you are working on the IOS. That wasn't my point in any regard. I don't believe not testing on specific hardware functionality makes it vender neutral.

Continuing with your logic, the CCIE simply becomes another sales cert. Why stop there, might as well start testing on 7xxx RSP redundancy also, and while you're at it....

But I do understand we all desire what we are most comfortable with. My opinion is in no way is intended to come across as combative. I just want to protect the sanctity of this certification in which i shed blood, sweat and years!

Ahriakin

Seriously don't let any of these rumours, or even if they are confirmed, about hardware changes put you off. You will find a way to work through it, we all do. Yes hardware and rack rental are relatively cheap now for the current tracks but that wasn't always so. When I started my CCSP putting together even a half decent lab was a pipe dream for me, I made do with that I could get. My CCIE lab was better compared to the course materials but still couldn't handle a lot of the full Lab scenarios so I re-wrote many to test the same basic principals on what I had. Ideal no, but definitely doable.

geezer301

I think Scott Morris implicitly acknowleges the coming of 6500 series switch in his INE forum message today.

Mrock4

geezer301 wrote: »

I think Scott Morris implicitly acknowleges the coming of 6500 series switch in his INE forum message today.

Link for everyone to the referenced post by Scott: Already news floating around about a Version 5 R&S Lab - IEOC - Internetwork Expert's Online Community

He doesn't acknowledge anything IMO. His post (for those too lazy to check the link ) is below:

---

"I will go with the "it will not surprise me if they do".

That should be correct, but even so, I would be asking myself what things could be different (in an R&S environment) for configuring a 6500 versus any other switch? They wouldn't be going off the deep end on fancy modules, so remove that paranoia.

At a basic level, what are the differences?

And I'd certainly anticipate you are correct about timing. Don't let any rumors derail your current studying!"

---

I don't think this says anything other than, it's possible. But then again, it always has been possible.

netn3rd

I frankly don't understand how the rumours could be true. I'm curious how they even got started. Cisco JUST revamped the R&S. If they were going to make those changes why didn't they put them in v4? v3 was around for years before they changed it. They don't, to my knowledge, have a history of making exam changes that fast.

CCIEWANNABE

netn3rd wrote: »

I frankly don't understand how the rumours could be true. I'm curious how they even got started. Cisco JUST revamped the R&S. If they were going to make those changes why didn't they put them in v4? v3 was around for years before they changed it. They don't, to my knowledge, have a history of making exam changes that fast.

+1, I don't think we will see a V5 for a while. Not worried about it. And like Scott said, a 6500 is just a layer 3 switch, no need to freak out.

Ahriakin

Yup they couldn't throw in every module out there, probably just the basics of installation/configuration for accessing the different cards. I work on 6500s a little and 7600s a lot at work but all it took was some basic reasearch to get up to speed on navigating them in special circumstances. The Switching and routing modules work exactly the same as any other I've worked on (mostly.... ).

apd123

Version 5 wow Cisco just stop no one is passing version 4. Anyone in the 360 program with insight? Have they even updated it for the version 4 troubleshooting etc or is it just a OEQ waiver program now? To those who think this is no big deal have you been through the whole CCIE process (circus) yet?

I think Cisco should just get it over with and allow students who pass the lab but fail the OEQ to either pay a certain amount of money or enroll in the 360 program postmortem and be awarded a CCIE. We got something similar here where I am at in the the states if you don't make it through High School but you pay and attend your needed classes during the summer following then you receive a High School diploma rather than having to get a GED.