At 5:01 PM +0000 6/25/03, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: >rbx10 Defcom wrote: >> >> Thank you all !!! >> I really appreciated. >> Annlee, I meant "major" which relate to the important ones for >> the ccie written. > >You don't have to know any RFCs for CCIE!? I've talked to quite a few CCIEs >who don't even know how TCP works. Afterall it's just payload in a packet >that a router forwards.
But if you start getting into NAT and load balancers, it's essential knowledge. > >I liked dre's comment about grouping them by category. My list is focused on >understanding protocol behavior for the fundamental protocols found on >enterprise networks. There are many other categories. One natural way to characterize the ones that aren't fully stable is to review the drafts and RFCs by the IETF Working Group: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html Now, you won't find old and stable things there like basic IPv4. You may also find exceptionally valuable drafts. For example, the current draft 20 of the revision to the BGP specification, RFC 1771, is a far better picture of real-world BGP than is 1771. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71368&t=71276 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
