Hi all,
So I've completed my CCNP - and like its been stated before - that doesn't
really mean squat in today's job market. I have 5 years experience with an
ISP - 2 years as customer support - and 3 years in their network operations
group. Still having a problem finding a job. I'm considering specializing in
either security or ip telephony - obviously this wont help me short term as
the amount of experience I can gain in either is minimal in a short period
of time - but I'm thinking maybe 6 months down the road - which do you think
will be more in demand in the job market?

Thanks,
Bernie V

Report this post to a moderator

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 02:01:01 GMT, "bernie v"
<bernie@nospam_nycap.rr.com> wrote:

>Hi all,
>So I've completed my CCNP - and like its been stated before - that doesn't
>really mean squat in today's job market. I have 5 years experience with an
>ISP - 2 years as customer support - and 3 years in their network operations
>group. Still having a problem finding a job. I'm considering specializing in
>either security or ip telephony - obviously this wont help me short term as
>the amount of experience I can gain in either is minimal in a short period
>of time - but I'm thinking maybe 6 months down the road - which do you think
>will be more in demand in the job market?

That depends on whether you are looking long term or short term. I
don't think there is any question that security is the place to be
today. But like everything that has come before it, it *will* cool
off and something else will take its place in terms of being the "hot"
set of skills to have.

So I guess if you want to get into the security game at this point,
you are taking the chance of being a "Johnny come lately." I can't
predict when there will be a glut of people claiming to all be
security experts. Maybe it won't happen for two years, maybe next
week. Who knows.

IP Telephony I believe will be become increasingly important over the
next five years. I think the long term future is better for those
that start specializing in IP Telephony today. That is sort of what I
am doing (except that my job also demands it).

So that is my prediction, FWIW.

--Bernie

Report this post to a moderator

"Bernie" <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote in message
news:26B8F6D9492BD309.8A85B6C9E71F4772.733BA681BB3967F9@lp.airnews.net...
> On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 02:01:01 GMT, "bernie v"
> <bernie@nospam_nycap.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >So I've completed my CCNP - and like its been stated before - that
doesn't
> >really mean squat in today's job market. I have 5 years experience with
an
> >ISP - 2 years as customer support - and 3 years in their network
operations
> >group. Still having a problem finding a job. I'm considering specializing
in
> >either security or ip telephony - obviously this wont help me short term
as
> >the amount of experience I can gain in either is minimal in a short
period
> >of time - but I'm thinking maybe 6 months down the road - which do you
think

> >will be more in demand in the job market?
>
> That depends on whether you are looking long term or short term. I
> don't think there is any question that security is the place to be
> today. But like everything that has come before it, it *will* cool
> off and something else will take its place in terms of being the "hot"
> set of skills to have.
>
> So I guess if you want to get into the security game at this point,
> you are taking the chance of being a "Johnny come lately." I can't
> predict when there will be a glut of people claiming to all be
> security experts. Maybe it won't happen for two years, maybe next
> week. Who knows.
>
> IP Telephony I believe will be become increasingly important over the
> next five years. I think the long term future is better for those
> that start specializing in IP Telephony today. That is sort of what I
> am doing (except that my job also demands it).
>
> So that is my prediction, FWIW.

Both are fairly solid choices (or, at least, more solid than plain-vanilla
routing and switching).

But I would add the following to the discussion. If you really want to get
into security, and not just pseudo-security, but REAL security, you have to
become a wizard in OS's, especially Linux/UNIX. The fact is, I hate to say
it, but network security is really only a minor part of security. Go to any
reputable security website or convention or whatever, and note that for
every one paper or discussion about network security, there are probably 10
or 20 papers/discussions about OS's and apps. The fact is there really
isn't a lot of security work associated with networks, when you compare it
to the amount of security work required for layer-7 stuff.

IP telephony, too, is a bit too narrow. What is more important is general
VoX technologies, and particularly the understanding of how voice can be
integrated into applications through such avenues as CTI and TAPI. If all
VoIP offered was toll savings, I doubt that it would be anything more than
a niche technology. VoIP's real value-add is its 'feature velocity' and
particularly its potential to tie voice communications to potentially
anything you want.

Two other areas you didn't mention but I see as ports-in-a-storm are
storage-networking and SNA migration. Neither of these hillsides has been
overcome by the deluge - both of them are highly resistant to the skills
commoditization that is beseiging plain-vanilla routing and switching.
Let's face it, if all you know is IP routing, you don't know much, not in
this economy. But if you really understand things like Dlsw+ (not just for
the CCIE lab, but really really understand Dlsw+), SNASw, TN3270, CIP cards,
and things like that, you'll probably do allright. Same thing is true if
you really understand FibreChannel, LUN's, backup/restore, volume-managers,
and the like.





>
> --Bernie

Report this post to a moderator

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 03:09:32 GMT, "nrf" <noglikirf@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Bernie" <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote in message
>news:26B8F6D9492BD309.8A85B6C9E71F4772.733BA681BB3967F9@lp.airnews.net...
>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 02:01:01 GMT, "bernie v"
>> <bernie@nospam_nycap.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi all,
>> >So I've completed my CCNP - and like its been stated before - that
> doesn't
>> >really mean squat in today's job market. I have 5 years experience with
> an

>> >ISP - 2 years as customer support - and 3 years in their network
> operations
>> >group. Still having a problem finding a job. I'm considering specializing
> in

>> >either security or ip telephony - obviously this wont help me short term
> as

>> >the amount of experience I can gain in either is minimal in a short
> period
>> >of time - but I'm thinking maybe 6 months down the road - which do you
> think
>> >will be more in demand in the job market?
>>
>> That depends on whether you are looking long term or short term. I
>> don't think there is any question that security is the place to be
>> today. But like everything that has come before it, it *will* cool
>> off and something else will take its place in terms of being the "hot"
>> set of skills to have.
>>
>> So I guess if you want to get into the security game at this point,
>> you are taking the chance of being a "Johnny come lately." I can't
>> predict when there will be a glut of people claiming to all be
>> security experts. Maybe it won't happen for two years, maybe next
>> week. Who knows.
>>
>> IP Telephony I believe will be become increasingly important over the
>> next five years. I think the long term future is better for those
>> that start specializing in IP Telephony today. That is sort of what I
>> am doing (except that my job also demands it).
>>
>> So that is my prediction, FWIW.
>
>Both are fairly solid choices (or, at least, more solid than plain-vanilla
>routing and switching).
>
>But I would add the following to the discussion. If you really want to get
>into security, and not just pseudo-security, but REAL security, you have to
>become a wizard in OS's, especially Linux/UNIX. The fact is, I hate to say
>it, but network security is really only a minor part of security. Go to any
>reputable security website or convention or whatever, and note that for
>every one paper or discussion about network security, there are probably 10
>or 20 papers/discussions about OS's and apps. The fact is there really
>isn't a lot of security work associated with networks, when you compare it
>to the amount of security work required for layer-7 stuff.
>
>IP telephony, too, is a bit too narrow.

I wouldn't say that. It you are just talking about the network
transport/QoS piece, yes it is too narrow. But if you are talking
about all the voice products and features, then get ready to swim in
an ocean. There are a million voice features for the phones
themselves from hotelling to IVR scripts. Then there are the
voicemail systems with their million features. And then if that isn't
tricked up enough for you, you can learn about VoIP call center
products and apps. And then just for kickers you can mix in hybrid
phone systems where you have to manage a mix of digital, analog, and
native VoIP sets and PBXs.

So I guess when I suggest to get into IP Telephony, I am not
suggesting that a person learn QoS and 802.3af and just stop there.
Learn the whole enchilada...and be prepared to spend tons of time!

>What is more important is general
>VoX technologies, and particularly the understanding of how voice can be
>integrated into applications through such avenues as CTI and TAPI. If all
>VoIP offered was toll savings, I doubt that it would be anything more than
>a niche technology. VoIP's real value-add is its 'feature velocity' and
>particularly its potential to tie voice communications to potentially
>anything you want.
>
>Two other areas you didn't mention but I see as ports-in-a-storm are
>storage-networking and SNA migration.

Ok, not trying to gloat or make you eat crow, but I have to mention
this. About six months ago I said this very thing about SANs (in the
form of a prediction related to this exact same topic), and you had
the exact opposite opinion (that there was little promise in the
field). What gives?

--Bernie

Report this post to a moderator

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:42:04 -0600, Bernie <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote:


>>Two other areas you didn't mention but I see as ports-in-a-storm are
>>storage-networking and SNA migration.
>
>Ok, not trying to gloat or make you eat crow, but I have to mention
>this. About six months ago I said this very thing about SANs (in the
>form of a prediction related to this exact same topic), and you had
>the exact opposite opinion (that there was little promise in the
>field). What gives?


For the reference of the conversation I am talking about, here is the
link and a short quote (keeping it in context I said "SANs were
looming on the horizon" and this was part of your reply):

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=...618%40sccrnsc01

"SAN's being hot? I have to disagree - at least not with conventional
FibreChannel SAN's and not in the near-future (although things like
iSCSI remain a huge question mark, and might be tomorrow's hot
opportunity... or might not)."

--Bernie

Report this post to a moderator

"Bernie" <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote in message
news:CED98203CB1A75E4.94300B3C1DE85065.1FBC32C786A9F49D@lp.airnews.net...
> On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:42:04 -0600, Bernie <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote:
>
>
> >>Two other areas you didn't mention but I see as ports-in-a-storm are
> >>storage-networking and SNA migration.
> >
> >Ok, not trying to gloat or make you eat crow, but I have to mention
> >this. About six months ago I said this very thing about SANs (in the
> >form of a prediction related to this exact same topic), and you had
> >the exact opposite opinion (that there was little promise in the
> >field). What gives?
>
>
> For the reference of the conversation I am talking about, here is the
> link and a short quote (keeping it in context I said "SANs were
> looming on the horizon" and this was part of your reply):
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=...elm=aIgm8.89569
%24q2.8618%40sccrnsc01
>
> "SAN's being hot? I have to disagree - at least not with conventional
> FibreChannel SAN's and not in the near-future (although things like
> iSCSI remain a huge question mark, and might be tomorrow's hot
> opportunity... or might not)."

Actually, I believe the context of the old conversation was whether SAN's
themselves were hot, instead of whether SAN-type skills were hot, which are
2 different things. SAN's themselves, I don't think are hot. But SAN
skills are hot (or at least lukewarm). It's the same thing with, say, SNA.
SNA is not hot. But SNA skills are still lukewarm.

The key to why this is so is simple - barriers to entry. SAN is going down
(slowly), just like SNA is going down (again, slowly). On the other hand,
it is quite hard to actually get opportunities to learn SAN or SNA, and this
fact more than compensates for the fact that the demand is not great. Lots
of people know or can easily learn plain-vanilla routing and switching. But
how many people can actually get their hands on FibreChannel? Or a
mainframe/FEP?

Once again, it all boils down to supply and demand. Routing and switching
demand might be increasing (although with all the service-provider
bankruptcies, I'm not so sure), but that's swamped by the supply of all the
new people who learn routing and switching (for example, 150 new R/S CCIE's
every month) - and this is precisely why I think the outlook for
routing/switching skills to be poor. SAN stuff, on the other hand, might
not have increasing demand, but also has a constrained supply of people
because, quite frankly, it's hard to get the chance to learn it.

>
> --Bernie

Report this post to a moderator

>
> So I guess when I suggest to get into IP Telephony, I am not
> suggesting that a person learn QoS and 802.3af and just stop there.
> Learn the whole enchilada...and be prepared to spend tons of time!

I am hardly suggesting that people only stop at QoS and inline power. What
I'm actually saying is that people should not stop at learning, say, just IP
PBX's/soft-switches only, but should also pay attention to the plethora of
H323/MGCP media gateways, gatekeepers, SIP, and things of that nature. And
they have to further combine that with a strong knowledge of legacy
TDM-based PSTN systems which probably still be around when we are dead.
And the most important feature that I mention below - CTI/TAPI integration
(which is concentric with your discussion of IVR and unified messaging).

>
> >What is more important is general
> >VoX technologies, and particularly the understanding of how voice can be
> >integrated into applications through such avenues as CTI and TAPI. If
all
> >VoIP offered was toll savings, I doubt that it would be anything more
than
> >a niche technology. VoIP's real value-add is its 'feature velocity' and
> >particularly its potential to tie voice communications to potentially
> >anything you want.
> >
> >Two other areas you didn't mention but I see as ports-in-a-storm are
> >storage-networking and SNA migration.
>
> Ok, not trying to gloat or make you eat crow, but I have to mention
> this. About six months ago I said this very thing about SANs (in the
> form of a prediction related to this exact same topic), and you had
> the exact opposite opinion (that there was little promise in the
> field). What gives?

See my other posting.

>
> --Bernie

Report this post to a moderator

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 17:11:42 GMT, "nrf" <noglikirf@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Bernie" <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote in message
>news:CED98203CB1A75E4.94300B3C1DE85065.1FBC32C786A9F49D@lp.airnews.net...
>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:42:04 -0600, Bernie <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >>Two other areas you didn't mention but I see as ports-in-a-storm are
>> >>storage-networking and SNA migration.
>> >
>> >Ok, not trying to gloat or make you eat crow, but I have to mention
>> >this. About six months ago I said this very thing about SANs (in the
>> >form of a prediction related to this exact same topic), and you had
>> >the exact opposite opinion (that there was little promise in the
>> >field). What gives?
>>
>>
>> For the reference of the conversation I am talking about, here is the
>> link and a short quote (keeping it in context I said "SANs were
>> looming on the horizon" and this was part of your reply):
>>
>>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=...elm=aIgm8.89569
>%24q2.8618%40sccrnsc01
>>
>> "SAN's being hot? I have to disagree - at least not with conventional
>> FibreChannel SAN's and not in the near-future (although things like
>> iSCSI remain a huge question mark, and might be tomorrow's hot
>> opportunity... or might not)."
>
>Actually, I believe the context of the old conversation was whether SAN's
>themselves were hot, instead of whether SAN-type skills were hot,

No, I was in the process of giving career advice, not advice on
equipment purchasing decisions. I thought that was pretty clear at
the time.

>which are
>2 different things. SAN's themselves, I don't think are hot. But SAN
>skills are hot (or at least lukewarm).

Then if you would look at the original context, you would notice that
I was specifically talking about skills as we were commenting about
which areas had (or will have) demand. We weren't (at least I wasn't)
talking about product sales. In fact I was clearly talking about
which areas of technology people should invest into in order to be in
demand at the right time.


--Bernie

Report this post to a moderator

Reply-To: abuse@[127.0.0.1], see signature@[127.0.0.1]
Abuse-Reports-To: abuse at airmail.net to report improper postings
NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library1-aux.airnews.net
NNTP-Posting-Time: Fri Jan 24 18:27:45 2003
NNTP-Posting-Host: !XU"q1k-Vm"uP*j2_di\E8pou (Encoded at Airnews!)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
Xref: nntp3.aus1.giganews.com alt.certification.cisco:80762

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 17:16:11 GMT, "nrf" <noglikirf@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>>
>> So I guess when I suggest to get into IP Telephony, I am not
>> suggesting that a person learn QoS and 802.3af and just stop there.
>> Learn the whole enchilada...and be prepared to spend tons of time!
>
>I am hardly suggesting that people only stop at QoS and inline power. What
>I'm actually saying is that people should not stop at learning, say, just IP
>PBX's/soft-switches only, but should also pay attention to the plethora of
>H323/MGCP media gateways, gatekeepers, SIP, and things of that nature. And
>they have to further combine that with a strong knowledge of legacy
>TDM-based PSTN systems which probably still be around when we are dead.
>And the most important feature that I mention below - CTI/TAPI integration
>(which is concentric with your discussion of IVR and unified messaging).

Right. But I am sure that you can see why I would find it strange
that you would call this "narrow" as all of this does fit under the
umbrella of IP Telephony.

--Bernie

Report this post to a moderator

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 19:00:51 -0600, Bernie <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 17:16:11 GMT, "nrf" <noglikirf@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> So I guess when I suggest to get into IP Telephony, I am not
>>> suggesting that a person learn QoS and 802.3af and just stop there.
>>> Learn the whole enchilada...and be prepared to spend tons of time!
>>
>>I am hardly suggesting that people only stop at QoS and inline power. What
>>I'm actually saying is that people should not stop at learning, say, just IP
>>PBX's/soft-switches only, but should also pay attention to the plethora of
>>H323/MGCP media gateways, gatekeepers, SIP, and things of that nature. And
>>they have to further combine that with a strong knowledge of legacy
>>TDM-based PSTN systems which probably still be around when we are dead.
>>And the most important feature that I mention below - CTI/TAPI integration
>>(which is concentric with your discussion of IVR and unified messaging).
>
>Right. But I am sure that you can see why I would find it strange
>that you would call this "narrow" as all of this does fit under the
>umbrella of IP Telephony.

On second thought, I think I had your point backwards...you may have
been trying to say that a person that has a side specialty in voice
needs to go beyond just learning IP-based services. I misunderstood
because I consider just the IP-based services a vast realm (and it
is).

--Bernie

Report this post to a moderator