Yes me.
Still critical appraisal can only come from those with a blue peter badge?
Ok, to justify my criticism of your patently flippant appraisal/s I will elucidate. Numerous times throughout this thread you have stated points which are odd and imo (remember, like you I`m allowed this) have little validity, my appraisal of your contributions to this thread is that you have been vague,inaccurate and shown no in depth insight. this is
my opinion.
Ok so here goes.........
The CCNA was a little simplistic language test mostly (routed protocol v routing protocol) and unsurprisingly geared towards CISCO's worldview/gear. That said networking is interesting in my opinion, and the TCP/IP stuff is handy to know.
Where do I start with this, it is NOT a little simplistic language test, in FACT a huge amount of the CCNA (some would say an inordinate amount) is subnetting calculations. As far as "Cisco's worldview etc" , tbh I disagree here, an overwhelming amount of the content is NOT proprietary, rather core concepts relating to networking, but yes "TCP/IP stuff" is "handy to know", jeez y`know I think you're right.
On to the next gold.....
Sure knowing the language differences are handy if a little overstated in the qualification. Learning about cisco proprietary routing protocols (say EIGRP) that are not widely used is at best irrelevant and at worst an advert for their lockin. On that subject the books have full on adverts for cisco routers embedded in them. The whole thing only gets going when you learn the 7 layer model and TCP/IP in general and the emphasis on command line for Cisco iOS by rote, is dull and on many modern routers nearly irrelevant. My place uses drayteks and only the theory has helped. The insistance on 3 layer hierarchical network design being the be all and end all is great if you're a company who sells network gear but unlike anything I've seen in medium/small business (I'm sure at the top end it's the beez knees to have a million routers on your network).
Still maybe it has moved on since my day...
Highlighting EIGRP inclusion as a major bugbear is just weird, it is a TINY amount of the content, and tbh Cisco were and are one of if not THE networking giant so totally justified the inclusion, however little.
Oh, adverts in books....not in mine, but I`m sure you are being truthful, again though, really?
Yes, we know modern routers can have GUI's you`re just not getting the point here. Actually suggesting that this curriculum didn't help with your Drayteks is mental.The course helps with a huge amount of basic networking applying to most network devices, again, highlighting the "Draytek issue" as an example is just plain odd, perhaps suggesting no real in depth comprehension.
Right but you seemed to count your current employer using DrayTek devices as an entry in the 'against' column for the CCNA course. It read like you hinted that the CLI on modern routers was not a thing worth knowing about when honestly you couldn't be more wrong. That's why I brought the DrayTek part up - if that's all you need to touch then obviously knowing your way around IOS is pointless. But knowing IOS puts you in a very good position with other routers as well. VyOS is pretty much a clone, for example.
I don't agree with you that it's a giant Cisco advert, at all. But I guess it depends on how the course was taught. My course was led by a guy with more Cisco and Juniper certs than you could count, as well as having a PGCE and it was nothing like the course you described. None of the reading material I have (Cisco eReader) has router adverts in.
And, this poster telling you similar, I can tell from this guy's appraisal he knows the subject, I`m sorry from yours its all vague and inaccurate.
On we go....
Yeah we did the CCNA as part of our first year, which I generally got in the 90-95% mark for. Disclaimer I had worked in I.T/Development for 15 years when I did the degree, so maybe a chunk of it was old news.
Again, odd and vague, you
seem to suggest here that you "generally" got 90-95% for your first year, you subsequently claimed though that this score was for the actual Cisco exams, at best it's poor grammar (remember the simple language test eh
)AND you claim a chunk was old news.........ok.
More....
It wasn't continuous assessment, I think there were 2 separate exams on the Cisco site, although this is going back to 2005 ish. The University were a Cisco examination centre and offered it to external organisations (I know people who took the CCNA as external candidates at my Uni at that time). If I could be arsed I'd look up what my results were but I can't (think near 100%)
The certification lapses anyway doesn't it?
Notice how THIS time you say your Cisco (?) exam results were near 100%, not the "generally 90-95%" terminology you used before.
you also say the exams were "on the Cisco site", nuff said.
Phew.....
As for learning cli, true to some degree, but at the high level (CCNP) they do better than just a command sequence memory test and actually test your understanding of those commands.
CCNA does this, didn't you know?, remember the SIMS?, and not by rote, typically three routers, diagnose and rectify faults, another inaccuracy.
On.......
In summary I thought the CCNA was a piece of cake and I scored accordingly.
Those outside the Uni (external students) past it after a couple of weeks training and much of it is putting words in boxes based on their category/meaning, a simple language exercise. Probably part of the multichoice mentality that pervades a number of IT quals.
Frankly my degree I hold in higher regard than the "Company Certified" qualifications that made up some chunks of it.
Still if you renewed 3 times, to each their own...
Ostentatious boasting, usually when people do this it isn't a good sign, (imo).
Putting words in boxes is nonsense, simply untrue, why would anyone attempt such a foolish claim?
Anyways..........
And who compared draytek with cisco? Sorry did I question your scripture without being high enough in your church?
You did, unless you want to weasel out of it via semantics, go ahead.
Sorry readers.........more
CCNA in two week?! Really??
Bootcamp courses are not the best, there is so much matirial in ICND1 alone which they probably didn't have time to drill down in to you properly before starting icnd2 lol
CCNA is really for people who know the spectrum of topics already, new people are always better starting with ICND1 and then 2, so they can digest it properly
Sounds like some of these people were braindumping a lot of info.
Icnd1 to a newbie would take them by surprise and quite a lot of the time fail their first ever Cisco exam, because of the format, they didn't know they had sims, time running out etc, its quite common
See this poster?, you can tell in a heartbeat he knows the subject, that asides pay particular attention to the part highlighted....... you then responded thus......
Yes timed sims can be high pressure, but unlike CCNP they're fairly routine/drilled stuff.
The SIMS aren't timed, the exam is timed lol but you were subsequently to claim a spurious defence. Maybe though you made a mistake in "simple language"?, y`know that concept that is SO tiresome lol.
Lastly....
This is desperate now, as other have said, with background it's not that challenging, especially when you have all the time in the world to study.
Is it really so hard to take some criticism of the CCNA? It's not as if I've said it's not worth doing even. I just pointed out some flaws as I see them, your counter just seems to be about me which is a bit boring to be honest.
No one who has sat the exam except you has said this.To be clear, you said it was a "piece of cake", I found it challenging, I would expect someone who found it a piece of cake to contribute to this thread in a more coherent manner and to clearly display insight.
Is it really that hard to take criticism of your contribution?
These are my opinions derived from all the evidence I have detailed, not unreasonable imo.
