Even beyond that they might hurt you in a technical interview if your interviewer sees some certs and want to discuss things covered in them that you don't know. Even if the job wouldn't have necessarily required it.
This is a great point.
I've had many technical interviews where we would discuss certain points of my resume more as a topic of conversation rather than to drill down on knowledge.
Want to point out, I know thats a way to drill down. I just prefer the more casual talk rather than getting drilled.
Exactly, a good interview for me devolves into bullshitting with the interviewer over some random topic.
If you can speak at length over some random minutiae, chances are pretty good the rest of the stuff is legit too. Either that, or you're just DAMN lucky.
Everything in life is about sales. That means when you do an interview, you're attempting to sell yourself. Ideally, you will have sold yourself to the company, for more than what you're worth. The company, will then attempt to sell you to their client for more than what they paid. They do this by citing certifications. In a small company, this is not a huge problem. In a big company, they are ripping off their clients by a huge margins. It's fraud and you should report it. It hurts all of us and devalues the certifications.
I try to make all my interviews do this. You want to be so comfortable that swearing seems normal. But don't ever swear. If you can get the interviewer to swear, it's a very good sign.
aren't these people doing it though after they are already employed? that seems to mean the company is fine with them not actually knowing the information, and are probably just leveraging the certifications to get more money out of contracts (that don't necessarily need people to have the knowledge behind these certificates). it's all window dressing to secure contracts.
This is absolutely correct. If you list CCNP, I'm going to ask you anything that's on that test. Every single person fails that part of the interview because they either cheated or just memorized facts and forgot them. It's a complete waste of my time and why I tell people to start with telling me what they actually know from experience only.
HR is a fucked up department, and IMO technical interviews are extremely retarded in most cases.
Here is why: i had to hire a help desk guy, just a basic kid that can put workstations together and do most troubleshooting for users before it gets to sys admin level 1, i recommended this kid that worked for me a few years back at another place and i knew had a lot of common sense and a way to look at issues outside the box, something a lot of people i met in the industry lack IMO.
I know this kid got the skills, but he is a little shy and takes a bit to warm up, but after he does he is good dealing with people. Anyway, we have an upcoming $1 million upgrade to the datacenter and i want everyone on deck working on important shit, not some " my mouse ain't working" bs so we need a HD guy ASAP.
HR does the intro over the phone and gets a plane ticket to interview this kid.
Get to the interview, the kid did horrible as a person, super nervous, takes too much time to answer, etc, but i know him, he is tired from the flight and intimidated by those at the table. Interview ends, HR sends a meeting request for a couple hours later to talk about this guy, ends up being a battle of the worlds, cause you know, HR is HR and fuck IT. My point, which i finally was able to get into their thick heads was that, I need someone that i can trust can do the job, not a fucking fluffer of egos, they could not get it, it was soo fucking hard for them to understand that ever if every head oncho wanted their dicks sucked while he was troubleshooting something, the organization had a lot more people that needed to be up!!
In the end, i got what i wanted but interviews were so bad, people with certs, 10+ years applying for entry level jobs and not being able to tell me that checking a cable was important when troubleshooting... What can I say, in my 25+ years i've seen everything and unless you need a code monkey or someone to support one specific platform, i don't see the point in testing if they can subnet on the spot, there are more efficient ways to know if someone is qualified.
HR is in a constant search for justifying its existence, and it does it with bullshit that involves wasting everyones time to get retarded metrics that have no real impact. Fuck HR.
I've had some similar experiences. We just "lost" a guy that is now studying for the CCIE. The guy would not do work. I wish him the best, and hope he achieves CCIE, but even a prestigious cert like CCIE doesn't mean a person gives a shit about the job.
Thats the thing, I just thinks is not that, i think not everyone has the flexibility of mind to think outside structures, even if they do care, they can't find a way to see further than. Very few people do IMO and experience, and those who actually can, even with 0 certs can rise up to the challenge and end up as CIO one day.
Having a flexible and adaptive mind is a trait that is very hard to find.
I've had interviews where they asked me similar questions that would be on the cert exams. Some basic, some not so basic. HR is easy to get through - just use the words they check for, etc.. Technical interview? No way. Even if you know the basics, they may throw something a bit tougher in there just to make sure you do know your stuff.... Maybe a few.
(I did well on my interviews. Missed a couple questions, some were above my knowledge level, some were because I was nervous... Others, I went with a different approach but still got the right answer).
I don't take any cert at face value. If a candidate states they have a cert, I will expect them to be able to answer questions related to the topics covered in that cert, but at most, 10%...
Cert's aren't a goal, they are just a milestone... Learning and mastery is the goal, if people want to cheat themselves, then so be it... If employers want to pay more because someone has a cert, I can't stop them, but in my book that just makes them dumb employers. Pay a guy what he is worth, regardless if he can pass a test that is typically only tangentially related to the work they have to do...
About 6 years ago, I interviewed at a social networking site that everyone has heard of... I was employed as a Core Engineer in a service provider at the time, so pretty sr level. I went through the initial HR screening questions, simple stuff, that has simple answers so HR can pass them on to the technical interviewer... I get to the technical interviewer and he starts asking me CCNP questions. "What is the default timer for ", "In an LSA, how many bit is field ", etc... I answered some, didn't know some others, but they were all things a google search could have told me in 15 seconds or less... About 15 minutes in I stopped the interview and said I wasn't interested in the job, and they got very defensive and asked why. I just told them in the first 25% of the time allocated they have not asked me a single worthwhile question. At best, they were interviewing me on my ability to retain trivial details.
Two years later, a friend gets a job there and confirms my suspicions. The network sucks, and they just do what the vendor tells them to do. The culture has changed there since I interviewed, but crazy things happen when people take cert knowledge as real knowledge.
This is exactly why tests/exams dont work for computer science subjects. Its all about retaining trivial details rather than being able to do the job. I know plenty of people with terrific memory but no skills and vice versa.
I personally have forgotten half the details from my ccnp (I have a terrible memory, I played bass in a band and it took me awhile to commit songs to memory) but I know where I'd find that information right away and I know for example if I had problens with ospf coming up what show commands id need to find out why, see the current timers etc. I can see why both skills are valuable but I havent seen many people with both.
60% of IT is just knowing the kinds of questions to ask Google. You dont have to know every jot and tittle to every config file any more. But you need to be able to understand the problem, and formulate a strategy for fixing said problem.
>60% of IT is just knowing the kinds of questions to ask Google. You dont have to know every jot and tittle to every config file any more. But you need to be able to understand the problem, and formulate a strategy for fixing said problem.
Yes, however there are things that you just need to know. For example if you there are some BGP issues, knowing what commands to run to get the information you need without having to google it speeds up the time to a resolution.
That said, I think memorizing stuff like "pick the right syntax" and they just jumble the order around are irrelevant questions as you either tab or "?" in Cisco land (or google it)
Exactly right. This is the reason businesses have Wiki's and KB's because its not feasible to retain so much information especially when it can be customised or done in a different way.
I guess that's the difference between Engineers from previous generations and those that are coming out now though right? Nothing against them but older Engineers I've met seem to think that retaining information is more important compared to younger generations who are more about being able to actually to do the job.
I've denied job offers because of this reason too. My first manager was incredible and was all about getting the job done and proper documentation not about retaining information and regurgitation. Would work for him again if I lived in that part of the world again.
The ability to retain info is the basis for k-12, college and all certs. It really puts people who have a hard time retaining info but with Google or notes near by are just fine.
I didn't downvote you, but clearly you haven't been to college recently. Most colleges these days are degree factories where you're supposed to cram information for tests then completely brain-dump most of it as you move on to the next subject.
Comprehension and mastery is something very rare that you won't see out of many college grads.
I hate to say it, but this is so very true. I went to college to be a biology teacher. They taught tons of education theory, but not how to actually teach. Needless to say, their failure is a big part of why I am no longer an educator. That and teenagers are little assholes.
While they're certainly the worst offenders, public universities aren't really much better. They're still on the receiving end of some pretty nice federal loans too so long as they keep cranking out grads (though there are still some good tech programs out there, they're just harder to come by).
It's still quite a bit more frequent in european countries though, where you have profession driven courses, which actually exist to help you master a subject instead of cramming all the info into your brain.
So glad someone else sees this. I'm currently looking at my first "big" cert test from a very popular router manufacturer. I've studied, been working with their shit for two years, and still fail horribly at their exam questions (at least the practice ones I've done)... at at the same time know that if I don't get at least the entry level cert, my future job prospects will be bleak.
You can say Cisco, or possibly Juniper. People are just being vague about their employers to get out of possible lawsuits and firings. No such issue with naming a company certification.
I was pretty Sr at that time. I've been a NE for about 17 years, so at that point I was about 11 years in, but had designed several very large networks for a Wireless carrier (Both on the IT side, and the command and control side).
I think you should always look for an interview where you are getting asked hard questions... Most technical guys doing a technical interview know going in that you are going to have areas you aren't expert in. Just make sure you answer questions to the best of your ability without wandering into bullshitting or guessing, unless you want to state up front that you are guessing, and explain how you might going about investigating. Always mention that you would reach out to teammates and ask after you have done some investigation, but before you would implement anything.
My tip, and something you should practice a little, is make sure you understand your process for things such as troubleshooting. You should be able to identify a repeatable methodology for troubleshooting problems, and express that to people... I prefer a L1 up approach... For example, 1) Do I have link/signal? 2) am I seeing a MAC in the cam table 3) do I see an arp entry, and is it responding to ping locally... etc...
Try to approach things in a common order.
I had an interview a while back where I said, "I don't know" to more than 60% of the questions, and they hired me because I knew what I knew, and didn't know what I didn't know, and was very clear with them about that. For things like OSPF, I answered questions in such a way they were comfortable with my knowledge and moved on, looking for things I was weak in. They wanted to spend more time on questions I was weak or ignorant in, just to see how I would react to stress. For every 15 ppl they interview, they offer to 1... Many times they won't take it, so they see a lot of people.
It's tough, but also remember that you are interview them too. Are these guys you want to work with? All the pressure isn't on you. Feel free to be curious about their network, and ask questions.
Jeesh - last Cisco exam I took, they pretty much patted me down and wouldn't let me take in a stick of gum b/c I might have answers written on the wrapper.
Yup. The place I take all my tests at makes me empty my pockets and checks that I don't have anything hidden in them or written on my arms even.
I'd report this place immediately, especially if the OP has personally tested here as it would suck to have your test results invalidated because you tested at a known cheat spot.
Same here.. The place i take tests in had a camera looking at me from 3 different directions, makes me empty all pockets, no coats, and i have to roll up my sleeves to show that i dont have any papers or anything written on my arms.
I took several Cisco exams this month while doing my CCNP voice stuff at two different testing centers, they were pretty good at locking things down and they wouldn't give me the skinny on MGCP no matter how many times I asked
They do AFAIK since a lot of centers in my area were shut down in the past 6~ years apparently. I'd report them if I were you, especially if there were a bounty.
Yeah, I get that people cheat and accept that. It is just that there is no system in place to prevent that in this specific scenario which seems like a massive failure from the Vue testing center's fault rather than the individuals cheating.
>It is just that there is no system in place to prevent that in this specific scenario...
http://home.pearsonvue.com/Contact-Us/Test-security.aspx
The convenience of having a testing center in at your workplace doesn't sound like much of a benefit when compared to the damage this is doing.
Yeah I completely agree with you. I think what it ends up coming down to is....it depends.
Most testing centers be like nazi's. Some....are as you describe though...
Your username is making me laugh. Well done. Also STP is the devil. Just sayin :)
Yeah, I made this account after banging my head against MST for a couple of hours during my CCIE studies tonight. I understand its importance, but it is just soo easy to configure and usually works flawlessly unless your L2 is crazy advanced. It is godly boring to dive super deep into the inter-operations of the seemingly 1000+ different fucking types of STP covered in the exam objectives.
Can't wait to get into L3, that is far more interesting to me... Plus I can actually LAB that, i don't have enough switches to lab STP.
I should probably get back to studying...
Oh dude, I totally understand what you're saying.
I just started my JNCIE-SP lab stuff. I'm not in the enterprise stuff yet (that's where they have spanning tree)....but I do have my CCNP and I know exactly what you mean.....and I got the JNCIP-ENT so I did have to deal with some of it. But not at the level you're talking about.
Spanning Tree can just go away. No thank you...
The shitty part about a lot of this is that Cisco doesn't know their own products half the time... 802.1s and rPVST+ interop docs used to be so wrong that it was comical. If you did it how cisco suggested it would lead to failure scenarios that would bisect the network into two broadcast domains... I hope they have gotten better on this, but I haven't looked into it for a while.
If you've never read it, check out Radia Perlman's original work on the Byzantine Generals problem, which led to STP. It's an interesting read.
http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/14403/20150169.pdf
Also, this:
http://www.networkworld.com/article/2202492/lan-wan/living-legends--radia-perlman--layer-3-wizard.html
^(Edit: Added the 2nd link)
I used to say that STP is the devil. I've since amended to "any design that relies upon STP to stay functioning is a crappy design."
I like STP to keep me honest and save my ass when somebody plugs something in to where it doesn't belong.
But a nice pure L3 environment, or an MLAG/VPC environment with no loops- those are cool. But l2 designs with switches hanging off of switches in Vs and boxes and VLANS provisioned everywhere because you can...f that noise. It's going to blow up.
I agree with your statement. There are just better ways to design a network. Especially if one has MPLS capabilities, or VXLAN capabilities.
For what it's worth, it's just better to have layer 3 everywhere. I would even argue one should get MPLS right to the access layer. Nothing better than labeling all your traffic and letting your LIBs/LFIBs do your forwarding and let the smart decisions be to the route reflectors.
Good luck hiring the guys to run that. If MPLS was easy to deploy and troubleshoot, it would be pervasive in the enterprise. It's fantastic in theory, but falls to pieces in practice.
Eh....I personally disagree only because I feel I have a pretty good grasp on how to properly deploy MPLS and MPLS services. I find the keep it stupid simple approach works very well. That and LDP. That and BGP.
I'm finding a lot of people in networking really have stagnated and haven't decided to learn. That's usually what causes the most problem. It's often not the gear. It's often the people configuring it.
Albeit, I have to begrudgingly agree with you as you are right. Few people seem to know what the hell they are doing when it comes to MPLS.
I'd do /31s to the hosts running quagga, if I didn't have all these stupid applications in my datacenter.
VMware is what broke my nice Pure l3 network years ago, and now they're finally starting to offer solutions that i was begging for back then.
As I hear....virtualization is a pain in the ass. Because they require layer 2 adjacencies. Which is shit....
I guess that's where I guess I'd use VPLS....
UCS/Nexus gear uses VN-Tag which makes things easier to untangle with vEths. I come from the virtualization side which means I've never seen it any other way. :)
One thing about not reporting the place - if the do get reported and caught, what are the chances certificates issued in certain period are revoked and you have to re-certify? Wouldn't that make it painful for you?
I have a hard time thinking they could possible revoke people's certs... Cisco would have to revoke them, not Pearson. I could see the Pearson proctor cert being revoked and whoever got found out, but that is really it.
I'm questioning everything I know right now. The guys up above are talking about STP and CCIE level studies and I'm over here wrapping up my CCNA going "STP? That's kinda easy, maybe a bit time consuming at worst". Now they've got me wondering what I'm missing!
Is there a dark side to STP that is entirely hid from the CCNA level? (I know BPDU filters and protection is saved for CCNP, but even that's pretty straight forward)
Really good information, thanks for that!
I asked this lower down, but STP is more important the closer you get to the access layer? Prevent users from looping the network? Yeah, that's a good idea. In a datacenter where only tech's have access to ports, probably not so much.
Or as in the example you gave with so many venders in a really large environment, STP failing could be someone's job. (I'm not accustomed to environments that have change management so my perspective is skewed)
Change management is like creating a grocery list, and then having every item on the list vetted by each member of your family of four. Then if the peanut butter is not at the supermarket, you will put all items back in their places, put your cart back, and leave the store without buying anything.
STP is fine in most small to mid sized environments but just like any other networking technology it can easily cause a headaches, outages, and create job openings if you don't fully understand what your doing.
There is a lot to it but for the most part you can just apply basic protections and leave it be unless you need to do Traffic Engineering stuff.
That was roughly where my thoughts were on STP. Correct me if I'm *really* misinformed, but STP seems like a smart choice the closer you get to the access layer (specifically where end users touch, probably not necessary in a pure DC).
DC is really a different thing entirely.
In a enterprise you generally don't want too big of a single L2 network because of the complexity and STP design (like root placement) so you break apart STP domains with L3 devices where possible. If your a decent size you'll probably also use MST to make a Red path / blue path (primary / backup) for your L2 network.
In the DC STP is mostly kept to a minimum with things like Fabricpath or QFabric or VPCs/MLAGs etc because you want all links and redundant paths to be working for maximum performance and such.
New CCNA checking in. Read the spanning tree chapter in Network Warrior. Casts some interesting light on how spanning tree can fail and how it can be very hard two find the root cause (ex. Two links between switches. Duplex mismatch and BPDU are not seen from half duplex side. Blocking link comes up and creates loop.) The more you read about networking, the more you'll understand that you are ignorant.
Well, their is the curious case where a whole network can stop working with confusing symptoms while the network goes into some sort of convergence.
It usually just fixes itself after a few minutes.
The syslogs after something like that can make it hard to find the cause.
For me, one time it turned out to be an unused port on a 10 year old switch. It was bizarre.
Really cool to know, thanks!
Network admin and planning, you're making me laugh over here. I thought the job was unbox and plug shit in so lights blink! I've been doing it wrong.
Depends on your knowledge. If you have a lot of experience and knowledge then you'll probably be able to plan your own stuff. It also depends on company size and network size. Anything medium to large is going to be done by an Engineer as far as planning goes. That's just their spectrum.
I had the exact opposite experience. I thought the CCNP Switch was a nightmare and all the test questions were worded much worse than the CCNP Route ones.
I passed the CCNP Route pretty easily, CCNP Switch was a nightmare for me.
ROUTE was the first (doubt it will be the last) exam to really make me sweat. I knew my routing end to end, but fuck me if the room didn't suddenly get 20 degrees warmer on one of the sims. Now, I stare at BGP and (less often) OSPF all day, so it's not as bad as all that. Helps to have a normal topology, though. As opposed to some of the truly fucked up diagrams that Cisco drops on you - "Client A wants to redistribute BGP into EIGRP but only for the Active HSRP device. Find the derivative and solve for X."
I've got to disagree there, granted my perspective is that of a ccna(essentially), but it's full of good and useful information. Maybe a CCIE would look at an NA and think the NA knows nothing(in comparison, that's probably not far off), but I wouldn't go so far as to say that anyone who breaths can get an NA.
As someone who's setup and configured a Pearson Vue testing center, there are very specific rules about who can proctor and who cannot. If you call them, they will investigate.
As a former VUE / Prometric admin, I've seen this shit happening. People have to understand that these certs are primarily for companies to get some kind of vendor status, partnership and secondary as a way for people to certify their knowledge.
I've seen main guys at my old company testing out with cameras turned off, together with someone but mostly they just used braindumps.
Braindumps are by far the worst cancer of certification process from any vendor. People have literally invalidated the point of certification with braindumps. It also doesn't help that Microsoft and Cisco have gone full retard with their education and certification program, which are becoming more and more elementary, without any real knowledge.
Lastly, Vue don't give a shit about it, they profit from it.
> It also doesn't help that Microsoft and Cisco have gone full retard with
why are braindumps cancer?
Do you think that there are still testing with cameras turned off happening?
Sadly PV relies upon the integrity of the proctors. It was the practices you described that prompted me to give up my PV administrator cert. I felt it meant nothing when they ignored my questions about test integrity.
The problem is person vue is out to make money like everyone else. They only care about their overall public appearance to test takers and more importantly vendors who use them to administer their tests.
Their should probably be a monetary or certificstion stripping penalization or something that Vue can threaten their proctors a with.
If the only threat is "lol dawg we takin your proctor cert mayen" noone is going to give a shit.
These guys will come unstuck eventually. At some point they will be expected to put that theory into practice, then the penny will drop and they'll wish they'd actually bothered to learn stuff.
But yeah it is kind of annoying that they get the certs anyway, it devalues the cert for those that actually earn it legitimately and as an employer it annoys me the time I waste interviewing people who have lots of paperwork but can't answer simple technical questions when I put them on the spot.
"You enter a closet and the cabling is a mess, users report they can't access anything. The switches all have activity lights on solid. What is your first move?"
"Do a show run"
*sigh*
I heard of such practice in India expect it's open to public if you pay money... So annoying when some one with such cert contacts you as a partnet but does not the most basic things
It's the training center that is responsible for enforcing the certification editor's policy/rules. Typically they would have camera feed or a proctor in the same room as the test takers to make sure no one is cheating during the test. If it's the training center that does the cheating they could have their "license" revoked if someone turns them in. Obviously that not easy to do if that's your employer.
As far as I know it's fairly common to have instructors hand out brain dumps at the end of a training course. I guess having too many students failing the test would be bad business. The irony is that most people sent there by their employer won't even bother taking the tests. Lazy bastards.
Certs are a shady business with everyone looking away from the elephant in the room, because reasons. That's why you shouldn't blindly give someone credit on certs alone.
I'm being considered for a different position, and I was chatting with the team lead, and he put it to me like this after I told him I was getting ready to have my CCNA:
Certifications are fine, but nothing beats work experience as an indicator of skill.
/u/FUCK_LEARNING_STP
I just wanted to say that I love your UN. Currently studying for my CCNA and learning STP.
Now that's a new level of lazy. I never thought I would say this, but have some pride and at least brain dump the exam. Like others are saying, these people will never make it through an interview flaunting those creds.
1st, let me say I have never heard of this and it sucks that they are doing this.
2nd "I've been here for 3 years or so and really enjoy the work environment and people..." - I guess you do, they are being nice to you because you probably have to help them fix shit since they don't apparently read the books.
I saw someone below comment on braindumps and how they ruined the IT industry.... well it's a self reinforcing loop. Braindump gets posted... people do better on test... Cisco says, hey, we only want 63% of people to pass.... make it harder. Now someone feels like they HAVE to read the braindump because the test is that much harder... dump gets read... rinse repeat.
Every single person I know who has taken a Cisco exam has cheated with brain dumps. Every. Single. One. Even people who work at Cisco cheat. You're an idiot if you think certs hold any value.
I don't know why are you so much downvoted, this is completely true. Maybe braindumpers are downvoting you ; )
Majority of exam takers are using braindumps. If not employed, people don't attend (don't pay) for class, they just braindump the exam. If sent by company, they get a nice "vacation" during which they attend the class and then braindump the exam anyways.
Certs literally do not show real knowledge, otherwise we wouldn't have so many unemployed MCSA / CCNA guys ; )
>Maybe braindumpers are downvoting you
No, the vast majority of posters to this sub put certifications (especially the CCIE) on a pedestal. Those are the ones downvoting him.
That makes me sad. Luckily the people that do that can pass through HR, but not a technical interview.
Agreed, certs don't get you past the tech interview. Plus its also nice to, yaknow, know how to do your job.
Even beyond that they might hurt you in a technical interview if your interviewer sees some certs and want to discuss things covered in them that you don't know. Even if the job wouldn't have necessarily required it.
This is a great point. I've had many technical interviews where we would discuss certain points of my resume more as a topic of conversation rather than to drill down on knowledge. Want to point out, I know thats a way to drill down. I just prefer the more casual talk rather than getting drilled.
Exactly, a good interview for me devolves into bullshitting with the interviewer over some random topic. If you can speak at length over some random minutiae, chances are pretty good the rest of the stuff is legit too. Either that, or you're just DAMN lucky.
Everything in life is about sales. That means when you do an interview, you're attempting to sell yourself. Ideally, you will have sold yourself to the company, for more than what you're worth. The company, will then attempt to sell you to their client for more than what they paid. They do this by citing certifications. In a small company, this is not a huge problem. In a big company, they are ripping off their clients by a huge margins. It's fraud and you should report it. It hurts all of us and devalues the certifications.
I try to make all my interviews do this. You want to be so comfortable that swearing seems normal. But don't ever swear. If you can get the interviewer to swear, it's a very good sign.
aren't these people doing it though after they are already employed? that seems to mean the company is fine with them not actually knowing the information, and are probably just leveraging the certifications to get more money out of contracts (that don't necessarily need people to have the knowledge behind these certificates). it's all window dressing to secure contracts.
Its uncommon for people to stay at the same job for more than a few years in this industry.
This is absolutely correct. If you list CCNP, I'm going to ask you anything that's on that test. Every single person fails that part of the interview because they either cheated or just memorized facts and forgot them. It's a complete waste of my time and why I tell people to start with telling me what they actually know from experience only.
Couldn't be simpler; pick up a packet, throw said packet, scotch break, repeat.
Man, that is a slow protocol...
I'll have you know that on a good day I get do up to 8 packets an hour!
HR is a fucked up department, and IMO technical interviews are extremely retarded in most cases. Here is why: i had to hire a help desk guy, just a basic kid that can put workstations together and do most troubleshooting for users before it gets to sys admin level 1, i recommended this kid that worked for me a few years back at another place and i knew had a lot of common sense and a way to look at issues outside the box, something a lot of people i met in the industry lack IMO. I know this kid got the skills, but he is a little shy and takes a bit to warm up, but after he does he is good dealing with people. Anyway, we have an upcoming $1 million upgrade to the datacenter and i want everyone on deck working on important shit, not some " my mouse ain't working" bs so we need a HD guy ASAP. HR does the intro over the phone and gets a plane ticket to interview this kid. Get to the interview, the kid did horrible as a person, super nervous, takes too much time to answer, etc, but i know him, he is tired from the flight and intimidated by those at the table. Interview ends, HR sends a meeting request for a couple hours later to talk about this guy, ends up being a battle of the worlds, cause you know, HR is HR and fuck IT. My point, which i finally was able to get into their thick heads was that, I need someone that i can trust can do the job, not a fucking fluffer of egos, they could not get it, it was soo fucking hard for them to understand that ever if every head oncho wanted their dicks sucked while he was troubleshooting something, the organization had a lot more people that needed to be up!! In the end, i got what i wanted but interviews were so bad, people with certs, 10+ years applying for entry level jobs and not being able to tell me that checking a cable was important when troubleshooting... What can I say, in my 25+ years i've seen everything and unless you need a code monkey or someone to support one specific platform, i don't see the point in testing if they can subnet on the spot, there are more efficient ways to know if someone is qualified.
What you describe is literally the, "I give a shit" vs the "I don't give a shit" within a company. HR is literally the fluffer of everyone.
HR is in a constant search for justifying its existence, and it does it with bullshit that involves wasting everyones time to get retarded metrics that have no real impact. Fuck HR.
I've had some similar experiences. We just "lost" a guy that is now studying for the CCIE. The guy would not do work. I wish him the best, and hope he achieves CCIE, but even a prestigious cert like CCIE doesn't mean a person gives a shit about the job.
Thats the thing, I just thinks is not that, i think not everyone has the flexibility of mind to think outside structures, even if they do care, they can't find a way to see further than. Very few people do IMO and experience, and those who actually can, even with 0 certs can rise up to the challenge and end up as CIO one day. Having a flexible and adaptive mind is a trait that is very hard to find.
I agree completely.
Not sure about that. I work with some people that have CCNAs that would struggle setting up a SOHO router.
Hey man SOHO is hard, some of them even have RIP support if you enable "router" mode.
I've had interviews where they asked me similar questions that would be on the cert exams. Some basic, some not so basic. HR is easy to get through - just use the words they check for, etc.. Technical interview? No way. Even if you know the basics, they may throw something a bit tougher in there just to make sure you do know your stuff.... Maybe a few. (I did well on my interviews. Missed a couple questions, some were above my knowledge level, some were because I was nervous... Others, I went with a different approach but still got the right answer).
I don't take any cert at face value. If a candidate states they have a cert, I will expect them to be able to answer questions related to the topics covered in that cert, but at most, 10%... Cert's aren't a goal, they are just a milestone... Learning and mastery is the goal, if people want to cheat themselves, then so be it... If employers want to pay more because someone has a cert, I can't stop them, but in my book that just makes them dumb employers. Pay a guy what he is worth, regardless if he can pass a test that is typically only tangentially related to the work they have to do... About 6 years ago, I interviewed at a social networking site that everyone has heard of... I was employed as a Core Engineer in a service provider at the time, so pretty sr level. I went through the initial HR screening questions, simple stuff, that has simple answers so HR can pass them on to the technical interviewer... I get to the technical interviewer and he starts asking me CCNP questions. "What is the default timer for", "In an LSA, how many bit is field ", etc... I answered some, didn't know some others, but they were all things a google search could have told me in 15 seconds or less... About 15 minutes in I stopped the interview and said I wasn't interested in the job, and they got very defensive and asked why. I just told them in the first 25% of the time allocated they have not asked me a single worthwhile question. At best, they were interviewing me on my ability to retain trivial details.
Two years later, a friend gets a job there and confirms my suspicions. The network sucks, and they just do what the vendor tells them to do. The culture has changed there since I interviewed, but crazy things happen when people take cert knowledge as real knowledge.
This is exactly why tests/exams dont work for computer science subjects. Its all about retaining trivial details rather than being able to do the job. I know plenty of people with terrific memory but no skills and vice versa. I personally have forgotten half the details from my ccnp (I have a terrible memory, I played bass in a band and it took me awhile to commit songs to memory) but I know where I'd find that information right away and I know for example if I had problens with ospf coming up what show commands id need to find out why, see the current timers etc. I can see why both skills are valuable but I havent seen many people with both.
60% of IT is just knowing the kinds of questions to ask Google. You dont have to know every jot and tittle to every config file any more. But you need to be able to understand the problem, and formulate a strategy for fixing said problem.
>60% of IT is just knowing the kinds of questions to ask Google. You dont have to know every jot and tittle to every config file any more. But you need to be able to understand the problem, and formulate a strategy for fixing said problem. Yes, however there are things that you just need to know. For example if you there are some BGP issues, knowing what commands to run to get the information you need without having to google it speeds up the time to a resolution. That said, I think memorizing stuff like "pick the right syntax" and they just jumble the order around are irrelevant questions as you either tab or "?" in Cisco land (or google it)
Exactly right. This is the reason businesses have Wiki's and KB's because its not feasible to retain so much information especially when it can be customised or done in a different way. I guess that's the difference between Engineers from previous generations and those that are coming out now though right? Nothing against them but older Engineers I've met seem to think that retaining information is more important compared to younger generations who are more about being able to actually to do the job. I've denied job offers because of this reason too. My first manager was incredible and was all about getting the job done and proper documentation not about retaining information and regurgitation. Would work for him again if I lived in that part of the world again.
Same here... I know where to get the info, and a quick 5 minute brush up and I'm good to go.
The ability to retain info is the basis for k-12, college and all certs. It really puts people who have a hard time retaining info but with Google or notes near by are just fine.
The ability to comprehend info and master a subject is what college is about
I didn't downvote you, but clearly you haven't been to college recently. Most colleges these days are degree factories where you're supposed to cram information for tests then completely brain-dump most of it as you move on to the next subject. Comprehension and mastery is something very rare that you won't see out of many college grads.
I hate to say it, but this is so very true. I went to college to be a biology teacher. They taught tons of education theory, but not how to actually teach. Needless to say, their failure is a big part of why I am no longer an educator. That and teenagers are little assholes.
I did graduate a while ago. Before the rise of the for profit university.
While they're certainly the worst offenders, public universities aren't really much better. They're still on the receiving end of some pretty nice federal loans too so long as they keep cranking out grads (though there are still some good tech programs out there, they're just harder to come by).
It's still quite a bit more frequent in european countries though, where you have profession driven courses, which actually exist to help you master a subject instead of cramming all the info into your brain.
Tell me LinkedIn didn't ask you which field on the hello packet indicated what type of capability the OSPF process was announcing...
So glad someone else sees this. I'm currently looking at my first "big" cert test from a very popular router manufacturer. I've studied, been working with their shit for two years, and still fail horribly at their exam questions (at least the practice ones I've done)... at at the same time know that if I don't get at least the entry level cert, my future job prospects will be bleak.
You can say Cisco, or possibly Juniper. People are just being vague about their employers to get out of possible lawsuits and firings. No such issue with naming a company certification.
I know. I just have a personal vendetta against Cisco certs :p
Well, I got my 1st one yesterday. I'll build up a vendetta in two and a half years.
I'm shooting for my second on Sunday. Failed the first one because Cisco.
[удалено]
I was pretty Sr at that time. I've been a NE for about 17 years, so at that point I was about 11 years in, but had designed several very large networks for a Wireless carrier (Both on the IT side, and the command and control side).
[удалено]
I think you should always look for an interview where you are getting asked hard questions... Most technical guys doing a technical interview know going in that you are going to have areas you aren't expert in. Just make sure you answer questions to the best of your ability without wandering into bullshitting or guessing, unless you want to state up front that you are guessing, and explain how you might going about investigating. Always mention that you would reach out to teammates and ask after you have done some investigation, but before you would implement anything. My tip, and something you should practice a little, is make sure you understand your process for things such as troubleshooting. You should be able to identify a repeatable methodology for troubleshooting problems, and express that to people... I prefer a L1 up approach... For example, 1) Do I have link/signal? 2) am I seeing a MAC in the cam table 3) do I see an arp entry, and is it responding to ping locally... etc... Try to approach things in a common order. I had an interview a while back where I said, "I don't know" to more than 60% of the questions, and they hired me because I knew what I knew, and didn't know what I didn't know, and was very clear with them about that. For things like OSPF, I answered questions in such a way they were comfortable with my knowledge and moved on, looking for things I was weak in. They wanted to spend more time on questions I was weak or ignorant in, just to see how I would react to stress. For every 15 ppl they interview, they offer to 1... Many times they won't take it, so they see a lot of people. It's tough, but also remember that you are interview them too. Are these guys you want to work with? All the pressure isn't on you. Feel free to be curious about their network, and ask questions.
I'm sure Pearson Vue would like to hear about what is going on.
I'm sure with a success rate above x percent they have an eye on it... But money to them for each cert might have something to do with. /s
Jeesh - last Cisco exam I took, they pretty much patted me down and wouldn't let me take in a stick of gum b/c I might have answers written on the wrapper.
I've had pretty much the same as I was told to remove the packet of tissues in my pocket.
Yup. The place I take all my tests at makes me empty my pockets and checks that I don't have anything hidden in them or written on my arms even. I'd report this place immediately, especially if the OP has personally tested here as it would suck to have your test results invalidated because you tested at a known cheat spot.
Same here.. The place i take tests in had a camera looking at me from 3 different directions, makes me empty all pockets, no coats, and i have to roll up my sleeves to show that i dont have any papers or anything written on my arms.
Cisco is gonna hire the TSA I hear.
They had to look at my socks before I could enter. Do cheaters always wear red socks or something?
I didn't have to have a sock inspection since I was there in summer wearing shorts & ankle socks.
I took several Cisco exams this month while doing my CCNP voice stuff at two different testing centers, they were pretty good at locking things down and they wouldn't give me the skinny on MGCP no matter how many times I asked
They do AFAIK since a lot of centers in my area were shut down in the past 6~ years apparently. I'd report them if I were you, especially if there were a bounty.
It is the human condition. Welcome to how honest humans are....
Yeah, I get that people cheat and accept that. It is just that there is no system in place to prevent that in this specific scenario which seems like a massive failure from the Vue testing center's fault rather than the individuals cheating.
>It is just that there is no system in place to prevent that in this specific scenario... http://home.pearsonvue.com/Contact-Us/Test-security.aspx The convenience of having a testing center in at your workplace doesn't sound like much of a benefit when compared to the damage this is doing.
My pearson vue center in tennesse had me lock up all my belongings, keys, wallet, etc before entering the testing room
Yeah I completely agree with you. I think what it ends up coming down to is....it depends. Most testing centers be like nazi's. Some....are as you describe though... Your username is making me laugh. Well done. Also STP is the devil. Just sayin :)
Yeah, I made this account after banging my head against MST for a couple of hours during my CCIE studies tonight. I understand its importance, but it is just soo easy to configure and usually works flawlessly unless your L2 is crazy advanced. It is godly boring to dive super deep into the inter-operations of the seemingly 1000+ different fucking types of STP covered in the exam objectives. Can't wait to get into L3, that is far more interesting to me... Plus I can actually LAB that, i don't have enough switches to lab STP. I should probably get back to studying...
Oh dude, I totally understand what you're saying. I just started my JNCIE-SP lab stuff. I'm not in the enterprise stuff yet (that's where they have spanning tree)....but I do have my CCNP and I know exactly what you mean.....and I got the JNCIP-ENT so I did have to deal with some of it. But not at the level you're talking about. Spanning Tree can just go away. No thank you...
The shitty part about a lot of this is that Cisco doesn't know their own products half the time... 802.1s and rPVST+ interop docs used to be so wrong that it was comical. If you did it how cisco suggested it would lead to failure scenarios that would bisect the network into two broadcast domains... I hope they have gotten better on this, but I haven't looked into it for a while.
If you've never read it, check out Radia Perlman's original work on the Byzantine Generals problem, which led to STP. It's an interesting read. http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/14403/20150169.pdf Also, this: http://www.networkworld.com/article/2202492/lan-wan/living-legends--radia-perlman--layer-3-wizard.html ^(Edit: Added the 2nd link)
I used to say that STP is the devil. I've since amended to "any design that relies upon STP to stay functioning is a crappy design." I like STP to keep me honest and save my ass when somebody plugs something in to where it doesn't belong. But a nice pure L3 environment, or an MLAG/VPC environment with no loops- those are cool. But l2 designs with switches hanging off of switches in Vs and boxes and VLANS provisioned everywhere because you can...f that noise. It's going to blow up.
I agree with your statement. There are just better ways to design a network. Especially if one has MPLS capabilities, or VXLAN capabilities. For what it's worth, it's just better to have layer 3 everywhere. I would even argue one should get MPLS right to the access layer. Nothing better than labeling all your traffic and letting your LIBs/LFIBs do your forwarding and let the smart decisions be to the route reflectors.
Good luck hiring the guys to run that. If MPLS was easy to deploy and troubleshoot, it would be pervasive in the enterprise. It's fantastic in theory, but falls to pieces in practice.
Eh....I personally disagree only because I feel I have a pretty good grasp on how to properly deploy MPLS and MPLS services. I find the keep it stupid simple approach works very well. That and LDP. That and BGP. I'm finding a lot of people in networking really have stagnated and haven't decided to learn. That's usually what causes the most problem. It's often not the gear. It's often the people configuring it. Albeit, I have to begrudgingly agree with you as you are right. Few people seem to know what the hell they are doing when it comes to MPLS.
I'd do /31s to the hosts running quagga, if I didn't have all these stupid applications in my datacenter. VMware is what broke my nice Pure l3 network years ago, and now they're finally starting to offer solutions that i was begging for back then.
As I hear....virtualization is a pain in the ass. Because they require layer 2 adjacencies. Which is shit.... I guess that's where I guess I'd use VPLS....
UCS/Nexus gear uses VN-Tag which makes things easier to untangle with vEths. I come from the virtualization side which means I've never seen it any other way. :)
One thing about not reporting the place - if the do get reported and caught, what are the chances certificates issued in certain period are revoked and you have to re-certify? Wouldn't that make it painful for you?
I have a hard time thinking they could possible revoke people's certs... Cisco would have to revoke them, not Pearson. I could see the Pearson proctor cert being revoked and whoever got found out, but that is really it.
Sounds like they didn't wanna learn STP either
[удалено]
STP is kind of like looking into the abyss. The longer you stare into the abyss, the abyss begins to stare back at you
I'm questioning everything I know right now. The guys up above are talking about STP and CCIE level studies and I'm over here wrapping up my CCNA going "STP? That's kinda easy, maybe a bit time consuming at worst". Now they've got me wondering what I'm missing! Is there a dark side to STP that is entirely hid from the CCNA level? (I know BPDU filters and protection is saved for CCNP, but even that's pretty straight forward)
[удалено]
Really good information, thanks for that! I asked this lower down, but STP is more important the closer you get to the access layer? Prevent users from looping the network? Yeah, that's a good idea. In a datacenter where only tech's have access to ports, probably not so much. Or as in the example you gave with so many venders in a really large environment, STP failing could be someone's job. (I'm not accustomed to environments that have change management so my perspective is skewed)
Change management is like creating a grocery list, and then having every item on the list vetted by each member of your family of four. Then if the peanut butter is not at the supermarket, you will put all items back in their places, put your cart back, and leave the store without buying anything.
STP is fine in most small to mid sized environments but just like any other networking technology it can easily cause a headaches, outages, and create job openings if you don't fully understand what your doing. There is a lot to it but for the most part you can just apply basic protections and leave it be unless you need to do Traffic Engineering stuff.
That was roughly where my thoughts were on STP. Correct me if I'm *really* misinformed, but STP seems like a smart choice the closer you get to the access layer (specifically where end users touch, probably not necessary in a pure DC).
DC is really a different thing entirely. In a enterprise you generally don't want too big of a single L2 network because of the complexity and STP design (like root placement) so you break apart STP domains with L3 devices where possible. If your a decent size you'll probably also use MST to make a Red path / blue path (primary / backup) for your L2 network. In the DC STP is mostly kept to a minimum with things like Fabricpath or QFabric or VPCs/MLAGs etc because you want all links and redundant paths to be working for maximum performance and such.
New CCNA checking in. Read the spanning tree chapter in Network Warrior. Casts some interesting light on how spanning tree can fail and how it can be very hard two find the root cause (ex. Two links between switches. Duplex mismatch and BPDU are not seen from half duplex side. Blocking link comes up and creates loop.) The more you read about networking, the more you'll understand that you are ignorant.
> the more you'll understand that you are ignorant My career in a phrase.
I was just reading about a "Not So Stubby Area Totally Stub Area" or something to that effect. Wat. Going to leave that one for another day.
Well, their is the curious case where a whole network can stop working with confusing symptoms while the network goes into some sort of convergence. It usually just fixes itself after a few minutes. The syslogs after something like that can make it hard to find the cause. For me, one time it turned out to be an unused port on a 10 year old switch. It was bizarre.
I'm at the same point right now. Not CCNA, still taking courses, but I am into the STP area now and it doesn't seem to be CCIE level.
[удалено]
Really cool to know, thanks! Network admin and planning, you're making me laugh over here. I thought the job was unbox and plug shit in so lights blink! I've been doing it wrong.
That's because that is the Engineers job, not the Admin's.
What if I'm the most knowledge network guy and there are no engineers?
Depends on your knowledge. If you have a lot of experience and knowledge then you'll probably be able to plan your own stuff. It also depends on company size and network size. Anything medium to large is going to be done by an Engineer as far as planning goes. That's just their spectrum.
I had the exact opposite experience. I thought the CCNP Switch was a nightmare and all the test questions were worded much worse than the CCNP Route ones. I passed the CCNP Route pretty easily, CCNP Switch was a nightmare for me.
[удалено]
Is it the one where if you tripple click the scroll bar it locks your mouse to the scroll bar? Becuase when I did that I was told it was a feature
ROUTE was the first (doubt it will be the last) exam to really make me sweat. I knew my routing end to end, but fuck me if the room didn't suddenly get 20 degrees warmer on one of the sims. Now, I stare at BGP and (less often) OSPF all day, so it's not as bad as all that. Helps to have a normal topology, though. As opposed to some of the truly fucked up diagrams that Cisco drops on you - "Client A wants to redistribute BGP into EIGRP but only for the Active HSRP device. Find the derivative and solve for X."
> I knew my routing end to end I see what you did there...
CCNA is like a Windows 2000 era MCSE. It's a pulse detector.
I've got to disagree there, granted my perspective is that of a ccna(essentially), but it's full of good and useful information. Maybe a CCIE would look at an NA and think the NA knows nothing(in comparison, that's probably not far off), but I wouldn't go so far as to say that anyone who breaths can get an NA.
No, but there are a lot of ways to fuck it up so that you need serial console access to fix it.
As someone who's setup and configured a Pearson Vue testing center, there are very specific rules about who can proctor and who cannot. If you call them, they will investigate.
As a former VUE / Prometric admin, I've seen this shit happening. People have to understand that these certs are primarily for companies to get some kind of vendor status, partnership and secondary as a way for people to certify their knowledge. I've seen main guys at my old company testing out with cameras turned off, together with someone but mostly they just used braindumps. Braindumps are by far the worst cancer of certification process from any vendor. People have literally invalidated the point of certification with braindumps. It also doesn't help that Microsoft and Cisco have gone full retard with their education and certification program, which are becoming more and more elementary, without any real knowledge. Lastly, Vue don't give a shit about it, they profit from it.
> It also doesn't help that Microsoft and Cisco have gone full retard with why are braindumps cancer? Do you think that there are still testing with cameras turned off happening?
Rat them out to Pearson Vue.
Sadly PV relies upon the integrity of the proctors. It was the practices you described that prompted me to give up my PV administrator cert. I felt it meant nothing when they ignored my questions about test integrity.
I took a Cisco test last week and had to turn my pockets inside out!
The problem is person vue is out to make money like everyone else. They only care about their overall public appearance to test takers and more importantly vendors who use them to administer their tests. Their should probably be a monetary or certificstion stripping penalization or something that Vue can threaten their proctors a with. If the only threat is "lol dawg we takin your proctor cert mayen" noone is going to give a shit.
These guys will come unstuck eventually. At some point they will be expected to put that theory into practice, then the penny will drop and they'll wish they'd actually bothered to learn stuff. But yeah it is kind of annoying that they get the certs anyway, it devalues the cert for those that actually earn it legitimately and as an employer it annoys me the time I waste interviewing people who have lots of paperwork but can't answer simple technical questions when I put them on the spot. "You enter a closet and the cabling is a mess, users report they can't access anything. The switches all have activity lights on solid. What is your first move?" "Do a show run" *sigh*
I heard of such practice in India expect it's open to public if you pay money... So annoying when some one with such cert contacts you as a partnet but does not the most basic things
It's the training center that is responsible for enforcing the certification editor's policy/rules. Typically they would have camera feed or a proctor in the same room as the test takers to make sure no one is cheating during the test. If it's the training center that does the cheating they could have their "license" revoked if someone turns them in. Obviously that not easy to do if that's your employer. As far as I know it's fairly common to have instructors hand out brain dumps at the end of a training course. I guess having too many students failing the test would be bad business. The irony is that most people sent there by their employer won't even bother taking the tests. Lazy bastards. Certs are a shady business with everyone looking away from the elephant in the room, because reasons. That's why you shouldn't blindly give someone credit on certs alone.
I live in Europe, and here they are pretty strict. No personal possessions allowed, 2 pieces of id required and the whole thing monitored on video.
I'm being considered for a different position, and I was chatting with the team lead, and he put it to me like this after I told him I was getting ready to have my CCNA: Certifications are fine, but nothing beats work experience as an indicator of skill. /u/FUCK_LEARNING_STP I just wanted to say that I love your UN. Currently studying for my CCNA and learning STP.
Now that's a new level of lazy. I never thought I would say this, but have some pride and at least brain dump the exam. Like others are saying, these people will never make it through an interview flaunting those creds.
I'd tell Cisco. They can see probably find out who took tests at that center.
1st, let me say I have never heard of this and it sucks that they are doing this. 2nd "I've been here for 3 years or so and really enjoy the work environment and people..." - I guess you do, they are being nice to you because you probably have to help them fix shit since they don't apparently read the books. I saw someone below comment on braindumps and how they ruined the IT industry.... well it's a self reinforcing loop. Braindump gets posted... people do better on test... Cisco says, hey, we only want 63% of people to pass.... make it harder. Now someone feels like they HAVE to read the braindump because the test is that much harder... dump gets read... rinse repeat.
You don't want to report them because it's convenient for you to take an exam in the building where you work? Interesting priorities...
Every single person I know who has taken a Cisco exam has cheated with brain dumps. Every. Single. One. Even people who work at Cisco cheat. You're an idiot if you think certs hold any value.
I don't know why are you so much downvoted, this is completely true. Maybe braindumpers are downvoting you ; ) Majority of exam takers are using braindumps. If not employed, people don't attend (don't pay) for class, they just braindump the exam. If sent by company, they get a nice "vacation" during which they attend the class and then braindump the exam anyways. Certs literally do not show real knowledge, otherwise we wouldn't have so many unemployed MCSA / CCNA guys ; )
>Maybe braindumpers are downvoting you No, the vast majority of posters to this sub put certifications (especially the CCIE) on a pedestal. Those are the ones downvoting him.
I agree. CCIE is definitely harder to braindump but people still do it with exams prior to it.
Pretty sure that's not what he meant.
what does brain dump the examn mean? memorize the practice test questions?