What to study for first?

fly351

Tell me what you guys/gals think... I haven't began my CCNP training yet (waiting on the books), but SWITCH looks pretty simple and I think I could knock it out in about a month. I know most people do Routing first as since its the hardest, but I kind of feel like if I can knock 1/3 down real fast that it will give me some encouragement to work on ROUTE even harder.

Thoughts? Has anyone that completed them in this order have any input as to if this order would be harder or easier?

Thanks

notgoing2fail

Well I'm officially 1 month into my SWITCH studies and expect to take the exam next week.

So we are talking 4-5 weeks, at least for me. (roughly)

From the consensus around here, ROUTE is a lot harder so I agree that if you can bang out 1/3 now, you might as well get it off your chest.

ROUTE will be hard whether you do it now or later. Same with TSHOOT.

My POV is knock down the easy ones if for anything, to build your self confidence.

mikearama

I believe you have the right order, as long as it works best for you... and most people, in fact, do switching first.

stuh84

While I'm still doing half of the old CCNP track, I went with BSCI (to you, Route) first, simply as I thought I'd get the hardest one out the way first, then the rest just gets easier from there.

Personally I'd find it much harder to go from CCNA to go to SWITCH with a jump in difficulty level, and then a jump AGAIN to ROUTE.

burbankmarc

I did the BSCI (route) first since I have (had) a higher aptitude for routing. I completed that in about 6 weeks. It took me a couple months to do the BCMSN (switch) so it really depends on the person.

networker050184

Just do which ever you want first out of ROUTE and SWITCH. Which one is more difficult depends completly on your prior knowledge of the subject matter. Don't just assume that SWITCH is "easier" because someone else said so.

Nuul

notgoing2fail wrote: »

From the consensus around here, ROUTE is a lot harder

Yeah, I keep seeing people say that. I must be weird, I thought BSCI was easier than BCMSN. *shrug*

notgoing2fail

Nuul wrote: »

Yeah, I keep seeing people say that. I must be weird, I thought BSCI was easier than BCMSN. *shrug*

Are you working with routing protocols on a daily basis? If so that could be why. I look at routing as more 3dimensional because of the subnetting along with the various different behaviors of each one. Especially with OSPF and EIGRP, Areas VS AS etc etc...

Whereas with switching, I just look at it more "flat". I don't know, it just seems like an easier concept for me to grasp....

Nuul

Honestly, I almost never touch the routing stuff. We're BGP for the WAN links to the MPLS provider and EIGRP internally. Pretty straight forward. I think the reason I found the switching harder was that I didn't study as much since I assumed I knew all the material.

fly351

Thanks for all the input. I think I will go ahead and do SWITCH first (I find it easier). Like notgoing2fail said, it is probably due to me working on more LAN's/switches than WAN's/routers through my career.

And... I got my books today!! Tracking said they weren't suppose to be here until Tuesday, so I am really surprised. Looks like a long weekend of studying!

billscott92787

I recommend going with it first. I did the BCMSN first on the old track and then did BSCI. I thought BSCI was a lot more difficult than BCMSN. It is all based on personal preference really. I'd just go with SWITCH, get it over with then go for ROUTE. I'd plan for at least three months for route, depending on "how much" you can study!

fly351

Well I put in a lot of time I started studying for my CCNA over the past 6 weeks. Over all time? geez... probably around 30 to 45 hours a week, so that was a minimum of 180 hours.

Cyanic

Layer 2 happens before Layer 3. In that way it makes sense to start with SWITCH, but it really does not matter.

stuh84

Cyanic wrote: »

Layer 2 happens before Layer 3. In that way it makes sense to start with SWITCH, but it really does not matter.

But by the same token you could connect 10 switches one after the other, and hosts on one side could get to the hosts on the other. Do the same with just 2 routers and you couldn't by default.

Therefore do you want to learn how to forward frames more efficiently, or to route packets at all?

So I don't think basing it on which layer comes first is best. I'm also finding that a few things like VACLs are a doddle due to learning route maps in the BSCI, and InterVLAN routing is scarcely taught in the BCMSN. I think the way I'm seeing it is more along the lines of, there is some parts in the switching syllabus which reference routing technologies, but its rare for anything in the routing syllabus to reference switching technologies.

Still, its up to the OP, just personally BSCI/routing made way more sense for me to go with first.

Cyanic

stuh84 wrote: »

But by the same token you could connect 10 switches one after the other, and hosts on one side could get to the hosts on the other. Do the same with just 2 routers and you couldn't by default.

I think you completely missed my point.

stuh84

Cyanic wrote: »

I think you completely missed my point.

You're going on the point that layer 2 is the first part in a network you'll come up against. I agree. But if you were thrown into a network with routers and switches, which would work in a basic fashion without intervention, and which would need configuring to do anything besides looking pretty?

Hence to me routing is the first place I'd go.

burbankmarc

stuh84 wrote: »

You're going on the point that layer 2 is the first part in a network you'll come up against. I agree. But if you were thrown into a network with routers and switches, which would work in a basic fashion without intervention, and which would need configuring to do anything besides looking pretty?

Hence to me routing is the first place I'd go.

But every network uses switching, and not all networks have complex routing. Small networks for example just have a connection to the internet, very very basic. But I bet they have at least 1 switch in there.

stuh84

I suppose. I just found that after the CCNA, looking at the BCMSN curriculum, I didn't see anything in general that I went "Hmm, I know absolutely nothing about that, and I might need it", VTP, etherchannel, STP, InterVLAN routing etc all are covered at a basic level in the CCNA, so it wasn't much new, just an extension of what topics I already knew. The BSCI got me interested as there was lots I didn't even have the slightest idea about.

It also didn't harm that in a job interview I had before I started the track that not once did they ask anything about anything switching, but I completely bombed the interview as I knew sod all about BGP at the time. I guess that shaped my view a bit.

I dunno, the BSCI was more of a challenge to learn everything, and I liked the challenge

I think I'm just a little surprised that more people wouldn't go for the BSCI first, but I guess it depends on your situation.

Cyanic

stuh84 wrote: »

It also didn't harm that in a job interview I had before I started the track that not once did they ask anything about anything switching, but I completely bombed the interview as I knew sod all about BGP at the time. I guess that shaped my view a bit.

Exactly, your view is based on your experience (not a bad thing). Both areas are important and my original post stated that it "really did not matter."

If you were to interview at my current place of work, we could care less about BGP as we default route out. However both are about equal here and we use HSRP and Etherchannel as well as OSPF and EIGRP with redistribution with some peers.

It really comes down to a personal preference as one will most likely be easier and more beneficial to someone then another.