I have a CCNA. I am preparing for my BSCI.

However I have committed to myself after I complete my BSCI to to go back and go over the fundamentals again.

I believe I have a fair knowledge, but my thinking is that I want the fundamentals to be so ingrained in to me that I could explain them in my sleep.

This means the core protocols like ARP, ICMP, DNS etc.

I felt like the CCNA and my preparation for it did not do me justice.

Specific training geared for one person is possible, all you would need is to select most suitable learning method for you.

Of course an ILT for one person would probably be quite exclusive solution, on the other hand there are many types of learning options to suit your specific needs.

Please do not hesitate to contact NIL Learning and Consulting Services for additional information. Looking forward to hear from you

Is it possible to have specific training geared for one person? I doubt but I thought I would still ask.

I have so many network questions I am almost a bit embarassed
See you in the forums

there are number of areas in which I think your way of running a company has couple drawbacks.

Mainly I think that this is not a sustainable model for running a bigger company as it does not conform to the ‘factory’ approach, where each unit specializes in the area in which they are best.

Yes, I agree that the way the ‘factory’ approach tranforms into reality is somehow cumbersome - sometimes presales are ‘too’ high level (”let’s put some network devices here and there”), implementation guys want to “just get the work done and gone”, and support people “don’t really care”, but I believe this all can be tamed and glued together with some good management skills and official handover processes.

To give you an example, we at work have something which is called a ‘release to production acceptance’ process which is run every time ’something’ has to move from ‘implementation’ status into full ‘production’ status thereby the implementation guys are handing over the network to the support guys. As part of this process the support/ongoing delivery guys check whether everything is properly documented and handed over properly, there are no flaws in the design, monitoring is setup etc.

The second drawback that I see in this way of running a company is that it is against the specialization approach where some people are only good at certain things (talkative people for presales, tech geeks for implementation etc.). Also you are giving away the time of your expensive CCIE employee, just to fix some small problem for a customer and be distracted by it from current work, which has obviously cost implication for you and your customers.

All in all, running the company with one man end-to-end responsibility is maybe nice for the customer, but certainly not sustainable and effective from long-term perspective.

Regards,
Pavel

In our company we used to follow the tradition which you were talking about. But now a days out CTO has changed the same like you were talking, in which a technical guy is sent with the sales person to understand the problem and after that technical guy prepares the design and handover to the implementation team and design guy will work with that team also. Prior implementing the solution we were fcing lot of problems like sales & presales guy commited the solution which may have some constraints in technical but now a days after the implementation of new solution we relaxed so much.

regards
shivlu

- If reliability is the primary concern, why are we using the Internet? The reliability of the Internet is likely going to be an order of magnitude less than that of a randomly chosen IOS release. The delta in reliability between this release and the release you choose after intensive investigation is going to be even smaller still.

- Is “well, we haven’t seen any problems with it” a good way of choosing an IOS? If that’s the litmus test, then why not call TAC for advice (who should be more in tune with known problems) and use the bug tracker to look for defects in the release? Coupled with smoke testing in the lab, this would seem to provide the same level of assurance as the partner’s recommendation, and at zero cost. The assumption here is that you and your team have the capability to do the work, which should be the case if the architect in question has reached the level of architect in a large financial institution.

Cisco Press published (a long time ago) a book on network reliability calculations which really puts this stuff in perspective. I wish I still had it so I could mention the title.

Thanks for all the descriptions of the various plans and designations that Cisco has for IOS releases.

Sean