When I was asked the default BGP timers across three different vendor platforms as measure of my networking ability during an interview, I replied saying I'd look them up if needed them.
I was told I didn't understand BGP in enough detail, despite being able to describe all the steps of BGP session establishment and route exchange. Certs have ruined the industry. On Jun 7, 2015 11:20 PM, "Jimmy Hess" <mysi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Stephen Satchell <l...@satchell.net> > wrote: > > On 06/07/2015 01:10 AM, Joshua Riesenweber wrote: [snip] > > What the industry could probably use most for entry-level certs is > a technical reading comprehension requirement on the certs, or a > requirement > of GRE scores e.g. 145 Verbal, 160 Math, before being able to obtain > the certs, to demonstrate an ability to read and understand documentation, > including BNF, and the ability to lookup something from a technical > manual, > read, understand, and apply it properly using qualified background > knowledge > at the level being certified. > > Too often, certs concentrate on trivial minutia that is "trivially > tested", but also not > frequently used, so the population has a bunch of people who just paid > copious $$$ for in-person coaching on _just the specifics of the exam_, > or people who memorized answers from stolen copies of exams. > > So even in that, many of the tests lose their ability, due to the > intervention of > 3rd party "learning providers" who are just making a quick buck training > candidates directly to exams, instead of teaching the subject. > > In short: In regards to the use of certifications when hiring --- they > can be used by > non-technical reviewers to help filter candidates, where there are > more applicants than > desired. Consider it a "bulk" filtering criteria that can be done > instantly without wasting > as much time, and the final filter might be an internal quiz and > human interviewers. > > > The certs are no definitive measure, but candidates with Both > experience and industry > certs to help confirm the quality of that experience are more likely > to be applicants worth > committing serious time to evaluate, And they can be used to help break > ties > between otherwise equal applicants in favor of those certified. > > > As to if it matters whether the certification is for Cisco equipment and > you > use X vendor equipment instead, I would refer to > semi-relevant link here: > http://www.jasonbock.net/jb/News/Item/7c334037d1a9437d9fa6506e2f35eaac > > > If Carpenters were hired like engineers.... > 'I see here, you have experience with cutting timber with "Makita and > Milwaukee brand Skillsaws" > Unfortunately, we need someone with 25 years experience using the > DeWalts.' > > Certifications can also be used by consultants/contractors to market > services, > or assure end customers that their services are by people "qualified > by the vendor > of their equipment". > > > > > The R&S CCIE lab exame is a timed practical exam, and as certification > tests > > goes it does a fair job measuring the ability of the candidate to > implement > > routers and switches to obtain certain results, ON CISCO EQUIPMENT. > (This > > is also true of the other Cisco certification tracks.) > > Correct. However, earning a certification such as CCIE demonstrates > that you are not > one of those clueless folks who completely lacks understanding and > ability to learn > basic config and troubleshooting. Earning the cert would require a > great deal of practice > due to their time limits, therefore the candidate that holds one > shows proof of > a certain level of dedication to advancement or learning within the field. > > And sufficient technical aptitude and ability to learn is implied by > the certificate to deal > with other vendor's equipment, even though Cisco's certifications only > address Cisco > equipment directly; there are many vendor-neutral concepts which should > have > been understood for success. > > > The specifics of configuration language and hardware are > "implementation details". > No certification measures a candidate's ability to quickly learn novel > configuration syntax > or special rules of arbitrary $new_vendor's equipment. > > > One can learn how to do almost anything. The real trick is being able to > > finish tasks quickly, and that's damn hard to do without practice, > practice, > > Ability to finish tasks *accurately* is what matters. > But very simple things should be done quickly. > > The results of non-repetitive tasks should always be looked at carefully > to help > validate accuracy,, > > And the practice required to do any tasks that are frequent and repetitive > should be gained by anyone qualified on the job fairly quickly. > > > That said, certifications show that the candidate can turn a wrench. It > > shows nothing about the candidate's ability to handle ARIN, to > troubleshoot > > political snafus, how to deal with management that is severely > > All of these are things that can be learned without a large amount of > grief, > you need reading comprehension; > ARIN's policies and tools are fairly well documented in writing. > > The candidate who can't even learn and pass a cert test might actually > be incapable of learning what is required on their own. > > It's not cost-effective to buy in-person training or certify for > *every little thing* that > comes up later. > > > clue-deficient, and most important play nice with colleagues at other > > -- > -JH >
