thenjduke road to CCNP

I officially starting my track for these new exams. I was looking at some of the old exams and I have to admit I am really looking forward to the CCNP exams. I have a subscription to CBT Nuggets through work so I will be using some of videos from there. I had my boss purchase the Cisco Press books. I will be doing the 642-813 SWITCH exam first.

So last night I was looking at the equipment I would need and I created another thread before this one asking what others thought I would need in my lab.

I watch the first The Switches Domain: Core Concepts and Design from CBT Nuggets last night. It was mostly review for me from my CCNA Studies.

I plan by tonight to read the first chapter of Cisco Press switch book.

This is going to be a slow process because I am starting WGU on July 1st but I really feel I can do both.

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

billscott92787

What are you using the CBT nuggets for the old track?

thenjduke

Bill just to get some of the core concepts down and back it up with the material from the book. Mostly the switching concept. I feel I learn a little more and understand more when I am watching the videos.

notgoing2fail

Congrats on your decision to go CCNP! You will find that half of the exam topics are rehashed. I'll give you a heads up now the new topics are: QOS, IP Telephony, Wireless and Campus LAN. It's all on the syllabus so I don't think I'm breaking any NDA rules.

The CBT Nuggets video is very good for ground concepts. They haven't changed, you just have to keep in mind that the new CCNP track has some different topics.

What is WGU?

zerglings

notgoing2fail wrote: »

What is WGU?

Western Governors University

thenjduke

notgoing2fail wrote: »

Congrats on your decision to go CCNP! You will find that half of the exam topics are rehashed. I'll give you a heads up now the new topics are: QOS, IP Telephony, Wireless and Campus LAN. It's all on the syllabus so I don't think I'm breaking any NDA rules.

The CBT Nuggets video is very good for ground concepts. They haven't changed, you just have to keep in mind that the new CCNP track has some different topics.

What is WGU?

Thanks for the heads up. You are not breaking the NDA for the different topics. WGU is Western Governors University. I have notice in the books what is different as well. I am just watching the videos for clarification but my main source is the books.

thenjduke

So got through the first chapter of the switch cisco press book. Interesting they are taking the PPDIOO approach on the exam. I actually like that they are making you think of each process and what is expected of a CCNP. This is good for real life experience. I been in the field for 15 years and taken many exams and not once has a exam wanted to cover the entire project from start to finish. This is going to be interesting. I was studing some of the CCNA Security topics but it was boring me. I feel more comfortable with CCNP Level stuff just coming from CCNA.

thenjduke

Watch the CBT Nuggets video about vlan theory. Pretty much review of what I have learn being in the field and CCNA Studies.

notgoing2fail

thenjduke wrote: »

Watch the CBT Nuggets video about vlan theory. Pretty much review of what I have learn being in the field and CCNA Studies.

I told you, SWITCH exam is going to be cake walk! LOL....

Selfmade

notgoing2fail wrote: »

I told you, SWITCH exam is going to be cake walk! LOL....

don't get TOO overconfident now

*BB*

thenjduke wrote: »

I was studing some of the CCNA Security topics but it was boring me. I feel more comfortable with CCNP Level stuff just coming from CCNA.

Yes, there was some very boring stuff, but there are topics covered in the security exam that are very applicable to the SWITCH exam, so I wouldnt completely discount it. Some of these topics, while lightly touched on in the SWITCH cert guide, are discussed more in depth in the security stuff I studied. Maybe the topics will be discussed in depth in the foundation guide, but we'll have to wait and see until the book comes out.

thenjduke

notgoing2fail wrote: »

I told you, SWITCH exam is going to be cake walk! LOL....

So far it is and sure I will learn new concepts. I am hoping anyhow.

thenjduke

Watched the CBT Nuggets for Trunking review and learn a little more about ISL. Wow what alot of overhead with putting all that 26 byte header into frame. I see why Cisco dropped it but understand their intentions behind it now. Native vlans are review and so is 802.1q. I plan to read chapter 2 of the Cisco press book tommorow. I started to build a lab in Packet Tracer and plan to order my first 3550 switch.

notgoing2fail

thenjduke wrote: »

Watched the CBT Nuggets for Trunking review and learn a little more about ISL. Wow what alot of overhead with putting all that 26 byte header into frame. I see why Cisco dropped it but understand their intentions behind it now. Native vlans are review and so is 802.1q. I plan to read chapter 2 of the Cisco press book tommorow. I started to build a lab in Packet Tracer and plan to order my first 3550 switch.

Now you know why I went with SWITCH first. The ROUTE is going to be a major speed block for me. My brain slows down when thinking about routing protocols......it's a weakness I must face head on though....

Good luck on the 3550 switch, it's a fun switch indeed....

zerglings

Cisco usually come up with their stuff and once the industry comes out with an open standard Cisco tries to drop the support of their stuff.

notgoing2fail

zerglings wrote: »

Cisco usually come up with their stuff and once the industry comes out with an open standard Cisco tries to drop the support of their stuff.

This is so true. Cisco doesn't wait around for the industry, then they copy or mimick, or make better what Cisco does and makes it a standard.

Notice how VRRP is so close to HSRP.

zerglings

notgoing2fail wrote: »

This is so true. Cisco doesn't wait around for the industry, then they copy or mimick, or make better what Cisco does and makes it a standard.

Notice how VRRP is so close to HSRP.

How about TDP and LDP? How about the original PoE before the IEEE? I am sure there are a lot more technologies than what I listed.

notgoing2fail

zerglings wrote: »

How about TDP and LDP? How about the original PoE before the IEEE? I am sure there are a lot more technologies than what I listed.

You got me on the TDP/LDP. I believe that is beyond the scope of what I've been reading so far...I'm sure I'll be running into it down the road...

zerglings

notgoing2fail wrote: »

You got me on the TDP/LDP. I believe that is beyond the scope of what I've been reading so far...I'm sure I'll be running into it down the road...

You'll be seeing that if you read ISCW and/or MPLS Fundamentals for sure.

You'll see different flavors of STP as well. Legacy STP, PVST, PVST+, Rapid STP, RPVST+, and MST/MSTP.

DevilWAH

what is great about networking is that it is so standards based. if it wasn't the internet could not exist or at least it would be so much harder. at one time every thing was propority. the best ideas are taken and a standard formed. with thiings like hsrp and vrrp, it is more a case of cisco show casing an idea in the form of hsrp, and suggesting it should become a standard which it then helped develope in the form of vrrp. its not so much the indstury copy ciscos ideas, cisco are part of developing the standard, as are many other of the big networking compinies.

notgoing2fail

DevilWAH wrote: »

what is great about networking is that it is so standards based. if it wasn't the internet could not exist or at least it would be so much harder. at one time every thing was propority. the best ideas are taken and a standard formed. with thiings like hsrp and vrrp, it is more a case of cisco show casing an idea in the form of hsrp, and suggesting it should become a standard which it then helped develope in the form of vrrp. its not so much the indstury copy ciscos ideas, cisco are part of developing the standard, as are many other of the big networking compinies.

Anyone know if Juniper created any protocols that became a standard?

thenjduke

notgoing2fail wrote: »

Anyone know if Juniper created any protocols that became a standard?

Have not got to my juniper studies yet. I remember working on juniper n25 at my last place of employment. Not sure if they made anything standard.

thenjduke

Read half way Chapter 2 of the Cisco Press switching book.
Pretty basic stuff about how a layer 2 switch process a frame by looking at destination mac address and the cam table and if entry is in the cam table it reads the port and vlan and if the mac address is not in the cam table them it will flood frame out all ports in the vlan except the port it was received from.
Talked about the Security ACL and QOS ACL and how the frame is process by looking at TCAM table and make a decision to look at one table. (I am a little confused on this but I do understand that it looks at the security and qos ACL and forwards the frame based off the ACL setup.) Maybe someone can clarify this for me.
Started to read about the Multilayer Operations and the types of multilayer switching.
Route caching basically uses the Route Processer to read the incoming packet to determine the destination of this packet and then the Switch Engine listens to the first packet and setups entry in the MLS cache and then all packets are forward based off the setup in the MLS cache. (Do I have this right?)
Going to read more tommorow. A little tired tonight.

zerglings

notgoing2fail wrote: »

Anyone know if Juniper created any protocols that became a standard?

I think they helped in some protocols that became standard. IIRC, they were part of MPLS development.

thenjduke

Listen to the cbt nuggets for vtp. I forgot a few things like vtp domain and password is sent to switches with no vtp domain in it. Mostly review of the switching world with about higher revision numbers and how vtp works.

DevilWAH

notgoing2fail wrote: »

Anyone know if Juniper created any protocols that became a standard?

i sure they have a lot of input. Cisco was there right from the start (one of the very first to make a comericial router). And remember things like HSRP are not new, they have been around 10+ years, and it was around a while before VRRP was standardised.

There is a reason CISCO has 80% share of the internet and corporate market. beause it was there first and played a major part in shaping the early fundamentals of networking that we all take for grantege. In the early days they where often the only player, so things like routing protocols they could play about with little competition, and pretty much write the standards how they wanted them.

These days theres a lot more players so the need for standards to be created upfront is greater. Think wireless standards, no ones going to try to go solo any more and develop there own. every one needs to be on the same page so now rather than rush of ahead like cisco once did, standards come first and then the manufactures implement them.

So unless a company comes up with something really new and different, I think we are unlickly to see the likes of it again. Even CISCO now has to walk the line with the rest of them. Ok it still has a loud voice in networking circles, and in my view is still be far the leader inn terms of quality and innovation. But its days of being the only player are long gone. once it could take its status as the world leader for grantage. Now its has to work hard to stay ahead. Also in my mind a good thing!

notgoing2fail

DevilWAH wrote: »

i sure they have a lot of input. Cisco was there right from the start (one of the very first to make a comericial router). And remember things like HSRP are not new, they have been around 10+ years, and it was around a while before VRRP was standardised.

There is a reason CISCO has 80% share of the internet and corporate market. beause it was there first and played a major part in shaping the early fundamentals of networking that we all take for grantege. In the early days they where often the only player, so things like routing protocols they could play about with little competition, and pretty much write the standards how they wanted them.

These days theres a lot more players so the need for standards to be created upfront is greater. Think wireless standards, no ones going to try to go solo any more and develop there own. every one needs to be on the same page so now rather than rush of ahead like cisco once did, standards come first and then the manufactures implement them.

So unless a company comes up with something really new and different, I think we are unlickly to see the likes of it again. Even CISCO now has to walk the line with the rest of them. Ok it still has a loud voice in networking circles, and in my view is still be far the leader inn terms of quality and innovation. But its days of being the only player are long gone. once it could take its status as the world leader for grantage. Now its has to work hard to stay ahead. Also in my mind a good thing!

Good write up!

I don't think I personally or any of us who are Cisco focused would care very much if Cisco regained more control. LOL. It would only benefit us....

It seems logical though, they were able to call the shots, and PRICES. Now the playing field is becoming a bit more even, so I suppose Cisco needs to tread a little lightly.

It does kinda seem like the IEEE are always a bit behind doesn't it?

DevilWAH

you have to rember the idea behind the IEE is they look at whats going on in the network filed. pick out the best ideas or the ones that seem common across the board and form the standards. so its only expected they are behind the times

notgoing2fail

DevilWAH wrote: »

you have to rember the idea behind the IEE is they look at whats going on in the network filed. pick out the best ideas or the ones that seem common across the board and form the standards. so its only expected they are behind the times

Yeah which makes it kinda suck for any vendor who is antsy to implement a feature.

They would have to spend their own money and research just to get it done.

Then IEEE will see how many people are using it in networks and create an open standard.....

I think I'm going to make a list of features that Cisco started first, and then it became a standard... LOL...

thenjduke

notgoing2fail wrote: »

Yeah which makes it kinda suck for any vendor who is antsy to implement a feature.

They would have to spend their own money and research just to get it done.

Then IEEE will see how many people are using it in networks and create an open standard.....

I think I'm going to make a list of features that Cisco started first, and then it became a standard... LOL...

I actually would like to see that list. It is nice though that IEEE makes standards because we be in the situation we were in the early 90s with having to use specific vendors because of proprietary hardware. It is nice to mix and match. I remember when Plug N Play came out. No more doing dip switches for IRQ

notgoing2fail

thenjduke wrote: »

I actually would like to see that list. It is nice though that IEEE makes standards because we be in the situation we were in the early 90s with having to use specific vendors because of proprietary hardware. It is nice to mix and match. I remember when Plug N Play came out. No more doing dip switches for IRQ

I'll start compiling the list as I run into them....

I remember those IRQ days, wow such a pain....when PnP came out, I just didn't believe it....