I'm thinking that was probably a fluke or something. IMO, the BSCI was virtually identical to BSCN with the addition of IS-IS. Although I had some study materials for ACRC, I never took it (because it changed to BSCN), so I can't compare the two. I might dig up my ACRC practice tests and stuff, because I can't really see the BSCN being *far* less detailed than ACRC..... from what I've read and see people say, there were only minor differences in the ACRC and BSCN.... But I also heard from people that the BCMSN was a bit more difficult than the CLSC (apparently the CLSC didn't cover multicast, IGMP, CGMP, MLS, etc).... But again, I didn't take it, so my comparison could be way off... A good friend of mine did CCNP then CCIE. He finished CCIE while I was working on CCNP. He did the "old style" CCNP (ACRC, CLSC, etc)..... I did the new style CCNP (BSCN, BCMSN, etc). We compared 'notes' so to speak, and I would say the CCNP of now is any less challenging than the previous version. If anything perhaps a bit more difficult because it encompassed a bit more......
Either way.... my point was that if you've taken BSCN/BSCI (and passed) then you should already have a more in-depth knowledge than needed on CCIE written .... Mike W. wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > "I think the depth of knowledge on each subject will not be touched by that > required > for CCNP/CCIE..." > Hmmph. I have done the BSCI, but none of the other exams for the CCIP (I > had the option of doing a freebie exam at Networkers, which is the only > reason I did it). The level of routing protocol knowledge required for > BSCI was very shallow, in my opinion. I haven't done the BSCN, either (I > did ACRC a few years ago), so I don't know how the BSCI compares to BSCN, > but the BSCI required *far* less detailed knowledge than the ACRC did. > I hope that the BSCN requires more routing knowledge than the BSCI, > because if not, I reckon the CCNP is going towards a cornflakes cert (or > maybe I just struck the easy BSCI questions). > > JMcL > ----- Forwarded by Jenny Mcleod/NSO/CSDA on 30/05/2002 04:12 pm ----- > > > "Michael L. Williams" > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 30/05/2002 01:28 pm > Please respond to "Michael L. Williams" > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > cc: > Subject: Re: CCIP - who is doing this one? [7:45166] > Is this part of a business decision process?: > > > "Brian Zeitz" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > It's like they pulled a few > > random topics from the CCIE (and CCNP) and made a cert out of it. I > > don't think many people are buying it. > > I agree, but that wouldn't make the certification invalid as such. Take > CCNP for example. Since CCIE was around first, couldn't it be said that > "it > looks like they took topics (routing, switch, remote access, > troubleshooting) and made a cert out of it" (CCNP). And that would be a > (mostly) true statement. But anyone who has done CCNP and at least the > CCIE > written can testify that the depth of knowledge of the CCIE can't touch > any > single CCNP exam. I mean, CCIE written required you to know > OSPF/BGP/EIGRP > but nowhere (IMHO) near the detail as the CCNP Routing exam. Especially > the > switching. The CCIE written should challenge anyone's switching knowledge > that has passed the BCMSN exam...... > > Having said that, I think (although I'm not personally pursuing it) that > the > CCIP, with it's focus on MCAST, QoS, and MPLS, is going to be a much more > detailed exam track similar to the way CCNP was compared to CCIE. I think > the depth of knowledge on each subject will not be touched by that > required > for CCNP/CCIE (except the Routing CCNP exam, which as pointed out, is > virtually identical to the CCNP routing exam except for IS-IS). I don't > think the little bit of Multicast learned in CCNP switching (which is more > than required for CCIE written, IMHO) would be adequate to pass the MCAST > exam. Etc etc..... > > To summarize, I'm personally not going for CCIP, but I could see how > employers in the right environment (i.e. using MPLS, Multicast, etc) might > perfer someone with a deeper background in those topics as opposed to a > CCNP > or even a CCIE...... > > My 2 cents..... > > Mike W. > Important: This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee and may > contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable or subject > to legal or parliamentary privilege. If you are not the intended recipient > you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or > dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by several > Commonwealth Acts of Parliament. If you have received this communication in > error please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this > transmission together with any attachments. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45441&t=45166 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
