From: Howard C. Berkowitz (hcb@gettcomm.com)
Date: Fri Nov 07 2003 - 15:12:24 GMT-3
At 10:50 AM -0800 11/7/03, dhoang4@yahoo.com wrote:
>don't sign up for certificationzone. you will waist
>your money. you can read all of this topic from cco.
Since I do have a financial relationship with Certzone, I hesitated
to answer this, and I do want people to make their own decisions
whether to subscribe to CertificationZone or not. Not all sources of
study materials are right for everyone. CertificationZone is not
right for everyone, and the same can be said for any training
material.
But before I consider that business relationship, I have to look
myself in the mirror and know that I'm being honest, and I'm paying
forward to the community the way my mentors did for me. In my
response below to ccie2be, you'll notice that I gave a specific Cisco
Press response, as well as a mention of a tutorial written by a
regular contributor here. In no way did I suggest that
CertificationZone is the only reference.
I don't want to get into the subjective issues of X's material being
written better than Y's. But I have to respond to some factual
inaccuracies. Of course, some of the information we produce uses CCO
as a reference, but any number of additional sources are used,
ranging from personal operational experience, to work as a Cisco
instructor, to active IETF/NANOG participation, etc.
>i
>used to be a member of the zone so i know.
Well, as Technical Director and a frequent author, I think I know a
little better. I can state with certaintly that with recent papers on
more recent technologies such as MPLS, VPNs, and high availability, a
significant amount of material came from IETF documents, from people
directly involved in the IETF and IRTF process. If for no other
reason than protection from copyright infringement, we are extremely
careful to avoid quoting from CCO -- as is any other publisher in
their right mind.
>most of
>writters of this site are nortel guys some cisco guys,
>so you will not get much helpful info from this site.
I invite anyone to look at the biographies of authors. Offhand, I can
only think of two that ever worked for Nortel. One of them is
decidedly not a guy. I'm the other, and I went to work for Nortel
about nine years after I first started working with Cisco. In
contrast, three contributors have worked for Juniper. So, if you
want to raise criticisms, at least claim the people are mostly
Juniper -- you'd be wrong, but statistically closer than you were
about Nortel.
A substantial number of the authors are Cisco certified, including
CCIE and CCSI, and, in at least one case, both.
>--- ccie2be <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>> My bad, I probably clicked the wrong button - reply
>> instead of reply all.
>>
>> That CertificationZone looks like it will be very
>> helpful. I'm going to
>> sign up.
>>
>> Thanks, dt
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>
>> To: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
>> Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 12:37 PM
>> Subject: Re: Relative Importance of ISIS
>> (Metric-style command)
>>
>>
>> > >Hi Howard,
>> > >
>> > >Thanks for getting back to me. I'm especially
>> impressed that among all
>> the
>> > >folks on GS, you would take the time to respond
>> to my post. (It's been
>> > >rumored that you're one of the top
>> internetworking guru's out there even
>> > >though you don't have a ccie. I've heard that
>> you're involved in writing
>> > >those RFC's that end up being implemented by
>> various vendors.)
>> > >
>> > >So, you're thinking of creating a ISIS study aid?
>> How do I sign up to
>> get
>> > >one of the first copies? Given the leaky bucket
>> that passes as my brain,
>> I
>> > >need all the study aids I can get.
>> >
>> > There's a two-part ISIS guide, written by Peter
>> van Oene, at
>> > Certificationzone.com, as well as multipart OSPF
>> and BGP guides I
>> > wrote. The comparison chart is something I expect
>> to write in the
> > > next month or so.
>> >
>> > >
>> > >On a more serious note, I'm trying to better
>> understand how to know when
>> I
>> > >need to change the metric style from it's
>> default, narrow, to wide.
>> >
>> > See Abe Martey's _ISIS Network Design Solutions_
>> (Cisco Press), p
>> > 173-4, p 222-225.
>> >
>> > Now that this is said, I have to make a timeout
>> signal. When I
>> > discuss this sort of thing with the community at
>> large, I make a
>> > point of doing it on the Groupstudy list, so
>> others can benefit and
>> > others can contribute. Priscilla has the same
>> philosophy, and goes
>> > further than I do in using a posting-only email
>> address. Peter knows
>> > ISIS better than I do, and might have other
>> insights.
>> >
>> > More than anything, it's a scalability issue. If I
>> allow myself to
>> > get into individual discussions with lots of
>> people, outside the
>> > context of a contract or something like the IETF,
>> I start running out
>> > of time to do billable things -- not that I have
>> as much of that as
>> > I'd like. The economy sucks everywhere.
>> >
>> > >I've
>> > >looked at the command reference but it didn't
>> answer that question except
>> to
>> > >say it's needed when doing MPLS traffic
>> engineering. Does that mean, if
>> > >MPLS isn't running, the metric style can always
>> be left at it's default
>> > >value? Also, do all ISIS routers in a network
>> have to run the same
>> metric
>> > >style for networking to work properly? Lastly, if
>> I'm not running the
>> right
>> > >metric style, how would I know? What would the
>> symptoms look like?
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios123/123cgcr/swt
>> ch_r/swi_m1.htm#1060108
>> > >
>> > >As a side note, why doesn't the command show up
>> in the 12.2 command
>> > >reference even though it was introduced in 12.0?
>> >
>> > Cisco moves in mysterious ways.
>> >
>> > >
>> > >12.2 ISIS command reference:
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fip
>> rrp_r/1rfisis.htm
>> > >
>> > >thanks again for getting back to me. dt
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >----- Original Message -----
>> > >From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>
>> > >To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>> > >Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 10:05 AM
>> > >Subject: Re: Relative Importance of ISIS
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> At 8:41 AM -0500 11/7/03, ccie2be wrote:
>> > >> >Hi group,
>> > >> >
>> > >> >I'm trying to decide how much time to spend
>> on IS-IS. I understand
>> the
>> > >basics
>> > >> >and can configure level I and II areas and
>> can set up a simple multi
>> area
>> > >ISIS
>> > >> >network, but I'm weak on all the more
>> advanced stuff. I have only a
>> > >couple
>> > >> >weeks left before the lab and I also want to
>> review and practice QoS,
>> > >Voice,
>> > >> >and ATM.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >Compared to those other 3 topics, how much
>> time should I spend
>> practicing
>> > >> >ISIS? By way of comparison, I'm very strong
>> on OSPF. How important
>> is
>> > >it
>> > >> >that I be just as strong on ISIS as I am on
>> OSPF?
>> > >>
>> > >> Let me answer indirectly. It would enhance
>> your understanding of
>> > >> both ISIS and OSPF to make a matrix of general
>> protocol functions
>> > >> (e.g., neighbor establishment, database
>> synchronization, flooding,
>> > >> DR/pseudonode election, etc.) and then make a
>> matrix with a brief
>> > >> note on how OSPF and ISIS each do it. You'll
>> find the protocols tend
>> > >> to have functions in common, but quite
>> different detailed
>> > >> implementation. You might even do just a
>> single column about how
>> > >> ISIS differs from OSPF (e.g., single
>> pseudonode/DIS rather than
>> > >> DR/BDR, or that ISIS L1 areas are equivalent
>> to OSPF totally stubby
>> > > > areas).
>> > >>
>> > >> It's a tossup whether you need to be as strong
>> in ISIS. A lot of the
>> > >> complexity in ISIS deals with ISP-oriented
>> tuning or traffic
>> > >> engineering. One of the reasons OSPF is
>> preferred in enterprises is
>> > >> that it has a lot more
>> policy/summarization/area options, which ISPs
>> > >> generally don't need. THe real question is how
>> much you'd expect
> > > >> Cisco to test for ISP-oriented features, which
>> they don't teach in
>> > >> their general classes, in the fundamentally
>> enterprise-oriented
>> > >> CCIE/R&S.
>> > >>
>> > >> >
>> > >> >Also, do people think it's worthwhile to
>> learn all the details of all
>> the
>> > >> >tuning parameters of which there seem to be
>> many?
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >> Funny you should mention that, because I've
>> been working on some
>>
>=== message truncated ===
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
>http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 12 2003 - 12:29:09 GMT-3