Category: training

Recent blog posts indicate that, in at least some market segments, IT certifications are becoming a new barrier to entry: companies require a specific set of certifications in their job offerings and use those requirements to filter the candidates who are invited to the initial interview. Obviously, IT vendors pushing the certifications are getting some real traction. On the other hand, anecdotal evidence indicates that certification holders are sometimes able to memorize vast amounts of information without being able to put it to use (I don’t want to imply that they used other, less honest methods).

The “Sometimes the path is more important than the destination” post has generated numerous highly interesting comments. I already planned to write about some of the issues raised by the readers (certification grind mill) or wrote about others (knowledge or recipes), so I’ll skip those and focus on the other interesting bits-and-pieces (but please make sure you read the original post first).

I received an interesting comment on one of my knowledge/certification-related posts:

I used to think that certifications were a useful indicator of knowledge or at least initiative, but I’m changing my mind. [...] I feel like I’ve gotten a lot out of studying for certifications, especially CCIE, but I’m starting to wonder if that’s the exception.

I guess a lot of prospective internetworking engineers are thinking along the same lines, so here’s my personal perspective on this issue.

We’ve spotted some of our best engineers when they were in the final years of their undergraduate studies. To continue the trend, NIL offers a student-engagement program that attracts highly promising candidates each year. They offer them CCNA training (after which the students have to pass the exam), a few weeks of hands-on instructor-led introductory bootcamps and the first CCNP course. These training courses should give students a solid foundation and a framework that they can expand on their own—which is the point where it's time to stress-test them with advanced bootcamps.

One of my readers made an interesting observation in response to my “Knowledge or recipes” post: maybe network associates need recipes more than knowledge. My first reaction was to disagree; in my understanding, technicians work with recipes, engineers need to know what they’re doing and why. But then I tried to figure out what the term “networking associate” really means.

A few days after my “Knowledge or Recipes” post, Greg Ferro started his “Experience or Certifications” series with a radical “I would always choose certification over experience” approach that quickly moderated into “Knowledge is more fundamental than experience … but you need both”. It’s nice to see someone else thinking along the same lines as yourself.

Several comments I’ve received in response to my “Knowledge or recipes” post were slightly resigned, leading me to the unfortunate conclusion that you all gave up and decided to live with the current state of the IT training business. But you can do something about it – go out and vote!

I've always believed that you need to teach your students (more so if they are engineers) how things work, so they'll be able to understand why they do things they way they do them. It seems to me, though, that the training courses I'm seeing veer ever more toward overviews and recipes ... but there are a few things you can do on your own.

My favorite provocateur has dreamed up another sensational story ... and even has numbers to back it up. Reverse engineering the increase in reported number of CCIEs and taking in account the estimated number of seats in Cisco's labs worldwide, he concluded that the pass rate for CCIE R/S is currently at 35% whereas in the past the rumors claimed it was only around 10%. The conclusions in the story should not surprise you ... it must be the braindumps and the devaluing of the CCIE program. Of course it's the braindumps: people like Petr Lapukhov, Jeremy Stretch, Arden Packeer, Joe Harris and tens of others (including yours truly) are dumping the contents of their gray cell matter into blogs and wikis, creating astounding amount of information that we've never got from Cisco in the past.

The CCIE preparation programs also cover an enormous amount of scenarios and variations, giving you lots of material to practice (BTW, when I was teaching CCIE preparation bootcamps 15 years ago, the pass rate of my students was over 90% as I simply forced them to configure all the possible stupidities Cisco IOS could do at that time). The tests don't have to get any easier; the participants (if the calculations are correct) are simply better prepared. Whether the increased number of CCIEs results in the perceived devaluing of the program is another question (remember: the supply/demand rules), but I am absolutely sure that people passing CCIE lab exam these days know approximately as much as those passing it two or three years ago.

Of course you could argue whether someone who did tens (or sometimes hundreds) of scenarios in his lab and then passed the CCIE test is an expert or a braindump cheater (let's wait for the first blog post that claims that), but I doubt anyone is able to remember so many recipes and apply the correct one without a profound understanding of the underlying issues.

Keep in mind: Use private IP addresses, AS numbers and domain names in all technical documentation you're producing (unless, of course, you're describing an actual network). If you're forced to use public addresses or AS numbers (for example, to illustrate how the neighbor remote-private-as command works), you should clearly state that they are imaginary.

You can safely use:

In his comment to the one of my NTP articles, Joe said:

This is part of the problem with NTP. It's way more complicated then it needs to be. You shouldn't have to understand so much of it to use it on your routers. Take a look at openntpd. It's free and runs on bsd or linux.

I have to disagree with him on several counts:

My recent post about a CCNP bootcamp program I was involved with generated interesting comments, most of them focusing on the question: “Does it make sense to attend a bootcamp?”

The answer depends on how you got to the stage where you want to (or need to) attain the CCxP certification. Before going into discussions on “experience” versus “knowledge retention” (potentially “aided” by brain dumps), please read The Top 10 Problems with IT Certification in 2008 article published by InformIT. My potential disagreements with this article are so minor that I will not even try to document them.

OK, now that we're on the same page, let's analyze why someone would want to pursue CCxP certification:

• To increase the salary or have better job options (as HR departments ask for people with specific set of certifications). From what I hear, this reason is more viable in US than the rest of the world (in most of Europe we can still test the technical skills of the candidates in any way we want without running the risk of being sued). Bootcamps might not be the best option for these candidates, as they tend to be priced similarly to the regular classes. Reading books or e-learning material (not to mention certain not-so-very-legitimate activities) will get you through the exams as long as they don't have the hands-on part ... and of course you'll end up having certification with zero experience;
• To learn something new and valuable resulting in a formal recognition of the effort. Don't even think about attending the bootcamps. If you're learning completely new concepts, go through the regular courses (or use e-learning combined with hands-on lab exercises). Highly intensive format of the bootcamps (after all, we're trying to squeeze almost two weeks worth of material into a single week) will fly way over your head.
• To formalize your experience ... either because you want to or because your employer needs certified head count (very common with Cisco partners trying to get better discount based on their partner status). In this case, a condensed bootcamp is usually the best option. For example, we had very successful bootcamp program a few years ago running back-to-back with the exams ... and, mind you, we used no cheating or brain dumps, the fact that the students took the exam right after the course obviously helped.

Last but definitely not least, it's worth mentioning that not all five-day courses have five days worth of content. In these cases, condensing them into bootcamps makes even more sense.

Following my post about the relationship between the MPLS and VPN architectures books and CCIP MPLS exam, Peter Dob had an excellent idea: combine the MPLS and VPN architectures (Volume I, CCIP edition would be even better) with the MPLS fundamentals from Luc de Ghein. By reading Luc's book, you'll also get exposure to other MPLS-related topics (for example, AToM) on top of MPLS TE overview that you need for the exam.

This article is part of You've asked for it series.

Every now and then I'm getting questions from my readers regarding the suitability of my MPLS books for the CCIP exam, for example:

I'm pursuing my CCIP and have a hard time finding the right MPLS study guide. I know you have the CCIP edition that was written in 2002, but I think the exam topics have changed. Can you recommend what book or books are best for the CCIP MPLS exam?

Are MPLS VPN Architectures Volume 1 & 2 two completely separate books or is Volume 2 a newer release. I was thinking of going for the CCIP and wanted to know if I should get both books or just the more recent one.