CCNA Certification Library 182
| Self-Study Certification Library | |
| author | Wendell Odom |
| pages | 1232 (combined) |
| publisher | Cisco Press |
| rating | 6 |
| reviewer | Michael Bennett Cohn |
| ISBN | 1587200953 |
| summary | Useful but annoying; Decent study materials for Cisco tests 640-811 and 641-821. |
Although it is possible to enroll in official ICND and INTRO courses created by Cisco, the books that make up this "library," apparently, are not the books used in those courses. Within the ICND book, Odom refers to "the ICND course, on which the exam is partly based," suggesting that what you have in your hands is a reverse-engineered study guide: a study guide for an exam that is based on a course that does not use said book. Odom occasionally presents tables that he claims come from the ICND course. Clearly, some parts of the course are not fair game for the study guide.
In other words, don't think that just because you are reading the official Cisco press CCNA study guides, you are dealing with a set of information that is as close as possible to the set of information from which the test was drawn.
Studying these books will prepare you for the CCNA in the same way that reading the Encyclopedia Britannica from A to Z will prepare you to identify the capital of Nairobi. It goes without saying that a CCNA candidate should not be studying just to pass a test, she should be studying to qualify herself for a job. But in this case, the difference between the material presented and the material actually making up the test is excessive.
Odom goes to a lot of effort to make the reader feel like he is being spoken to by a friend. "Fun, isn't it?" he writes, after presenting an illustration of function groups and access points that I had to re-draw for myself several times in order to understand. Later, he describes Inverse ARP as "another case of learning by listening, a great lesson for real life!" Gee, thanks. The subtle condescension in the non-humorous asides, the gleeful overuse of exclamation points, and the fable in which Pebbles Flintstone invents networking is compounded by the persistent contextual encapsulation of every single topic in the book. Odom tells you what he's going to tell you, then he tells you, then he tells you what he's told you, much more than necessary.
A better way to put the flustered reader at ease might have been to proofread the books. The ICND guide, especially, is so full of typos that it is often embarrassing to read. In some cases, these are nothing more than obvious misspellings that can be passed over without much more than a little annoyance (e.g. ICND p. 472, "status enquiry messages"). In other cases, the meaning of the sentence is muddled. Worse, the configuration examples have obviously not been proofread either, resulting in, for example, the prompt "R1(config)#" when the appropriate prompt is "R1(config-if)." The difference may seem trivial, but understanding its significance is the kind of stuff the CCNA is all about.
Each book comes with a CD containing a practice test engine and a router simulator (both from Boson). The mistakes in the ICND book pale in comparison to those in the CD test engines. In fact, an argument could be made that studying with those practice tests will hinder more than help the CCNA candidate who has not read the books thoroughly enough to recognize the mistakes. Many multiple-choice questions count correct answers wrong and vice versa (and some of these are taken directly from the books, which usually give the correct answer). A configuration entered into the CLI on a simulator question will be graded as wrong, and the user will then be presented with an identical configuration as an example of the correct way to solve the problem.
None of these problems change the fact that these books will, if used correctly, absolutely help you pass the CCNA. But do it this way: Read the INTRO book. Take the exam right away. If you don't pass, flip through the ICND book and find the areas that you actually need to work on. You'll save months of study time that could be better spent working on your CCNP.
I give the library as a whole 3 out of 5 stars.
You can purchase the CCNA Certification Library from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Just another SlashVert (Score:0, Interesting)
alleviating the outsourcing blues? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:CCNA is worthless for this very reason (Score:5, Interesting)
I had already passed their resume' screening and phone interview process and was now down to the face-to-face (also known as the `Eyes, Fingers and Toes` check) and an on-site technical interview. After a brief discussion of my qualifications and experiences, one of their lead engineers was called over.
Him: Okay, let's begin. Define `TCP/IP`.
Me:
Him: It's just a standard question.
Me:
Him: The MCSE is why I'm asking.
I kid you not. At the time I was sincerely insulted, but having spent a career surrounded by engineers who didn't know their asses from their elbows, I can see why he held that belief. The threat of the Paper MCSE is quite real -- and now, unfortunately, Cisco's certifications are being proven to have the same flaws.
Certifications in the tech world are just like degrees, people -- they're paper. They're that foot in the door. They're a proof that you can read a book and pass a standardized test. They don't guarantee employment. They may get you the interview, just don't expect more from them.
Limitations of product specific qualifications (Score:1, Interesting)
More interestingly some companies provide proprietry training and instruction that is very 'insider' and 'closed'. Its very difficult to find good staff for these problems without going to the company and headhunting guys who are just comming off the end of the course. We tend to avoid such solutions now because the staffing costs are far higher. Always better to use general principles and open source type solutions because you will have a far wider pool of skilled labor to tap.
Re:CCNA is worthless for this very reason (Score:4, Interesting)
How is it that Microsoft gets away with using this phrase when the certification is not recognized by the association of professional engineers?
CCNA a foot in the door (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:CCNA is worthless for this very reason (Score:2, Interesting)
I used to work for the largest web hosting provider in the world (no lie, I'm just not saying they're name here as they will probably see it) and they're top network engineers even admitted they could not pass the CCIE. one of the senior engineers friends took 8 times to pass just the written test! he had to wait over a year to fly out to texas to take the lab test and will not likely pass. (oh btw it's $7,000 per test, regardless if you fail).
So frankly I don't think the CCIE will ever devalue. once you obtain one of those you are golden. people will come to you, it's not necessary to go to them.
Re:Brain Dumping (Score:4, Interesting)
In my case I started this at home. Got the "addiction" and started buying and tinkering with computers as fast as my budget would allow. I used to be the guy who bought new games and secretly hoped something wouldn't work right out of the box so I could figure out why. One day I looked up and I knew enough that someone would actually pay me to fix PCs for a living.
Eventually that led me to better technician jobs and finally the desire to work on bigger problems. I got an entry level position here where I still work and started learning networks from my boss (And he started his "addiction" in the early 70's). At one point about four years ago management decided that we all needed to be MCSE certified and laid out a bunch of money to a training company for classes and vouchers. We were running Novell then and since we had been given the "We're switching to NT now" speech (again from management) they felt like we needed some training.
We were all like "Ok, whatever." I went to the first class and tried to get into it but I wasn't learning anything. Sure I was learning how much Microsoft thought of their product but everything relevant was stuff I learned on the job. I ended up passing on the rest of the classes and just picking up some "Dummies" books and finishing it on my own.
The vouchers my company paid for were of some use (because I wouldn't have bothered to pay for those tests on my own) and we ended up using the class time for another employee who needed some SQL training but the content was worthless. It amounted to me spending time learning enough "Administrivia" as you so nicely put it just to pass a stupid test I didn't really need and didn't want in the first place.
On the other hand my brother jumped into this field because you could make bank in it. He went to college, I didn't. He has a CIS (or one of those, I don't really know or care much) degree and as soon as he got out he went through the Certification feeding frenzy and jumped into a job from the get go that paid more than I was making. I tried to talk him into spending some time to learn a foundation but he wanted the money and he got it. The thing is though he's lost and in way over his head. I think it's only a matter of time before he's looking for work because he doesn't love this stuff and he doesn't know it well enough. His paper means not much in the long run.
It might sound like I'm looking forward to him hitting the wall but I'm not. I really just wish he'd listened to me (and had gone after something he enjoyed instead of what he thought was going to get him in a BMW faster). I've seen enough of the paper admins to know that no good comes of it.
Re:passed without classes... (Score:2, Interesting)
You get someone that knows basic routing and subnetting.
Out of the 5 (experienced
Well thats my rant for the evening
ps
Re:CCNA is worthless for this very reason (Score:2, Interesting)
Quite frankly, "engineer" without qualifiers such as "P.E." means very little. It's a generic term with no licensed or legally binding meanings.
For another example, I do have a B.S. in Computer Engineering from Iowa State University, but I elected not to take the P.E. exam. (for reference Computer Engineering is an offshoot of Electrical Engineering, specializing in a mixture of digital hardware design and software)
Does this make me an engineer or not? I've certainly taken all the course work and have a degree by that title from an accredited engineering program. I sat through all the same basic "engineering core" coursework as mechanical, civil and all degrees under the college of engineering require.
It's a term with a lot of meanings, and it's certainly not exclusive to the Association of Professional Engineers. (although the term Professional Engineer and the initials P.E. are exclusive to them, engineer is not)
Re:You need a CCIE, not CCNA... (Score:2, Interesting)