You are. If they are really serious about this, it's going to mean massive investments for serviceproviders. One thing is collecting customer statistics about source/destination and type of traffic - actually sniffing it, and sending it to central location(FBI/CIA whatever) is an entirely different matter that requires special hardware. E.g. a Juniper monitoring PIC (special expensive linecard for special expensive routers used by serviceproviders) doesn't come cheap, and the money has to come from somewhere - either from increased ISP fees, or increased tax in the unlikely event that the government is going to foot the bill.
A lot of the comments here is fairly negative to certifications, just remember that these are probably NOT the people that are going to hire you anyway. The way I see it, it is nothing WRONG with certifications, and if nothing else, it shows you have some drive, and is willing to put in an effort to read some books and go through the hassle getting certified.
If you're really good at something, but don't bother to get the certifications - in my eyes it shows that you're either a) not that good, or b) lazy. Note that I don't imply that ceritifications mean that you're really good.
I was laid off from my former job, and my certifications (MCSE, everything cisco including CCIE) helped me get a new one. They didn't get me the job, but they helped.
Also don't ignore the fact that a lot of companies doing business with cisco (resellers, silver/gold partners) are REQUIRED to employ a certain amount of certified people, so you might want to check out cisco premier resellers in your area.
In a pressed marked, everything counts, and I don't see why certifications shouldn't.
As a Cisco CCIE and working for a ISP, I will as politely as I can ask you: what have you been smoking? Weighted Fair Queuing does not solve any bandwidth issues. What it DOES do is to give priority to "streams" with few/small packets, making interactive traffic/voip perform better on congested low speed links (typically 10mbit or less).
However, it does not make a saturated Gigabit Ethernet(or similar) backbone link filled with kazaa traffic less saturated, and the only way to overcome saturated links is to upgrade the links, at a price.
SOME ISP's rate-limit P2P traffic to give their backbone links a breather, but that again rises the question of unlimited. Do you prefer to have your link limited so that you can download X gigabytes over a month, or do you prefer to download X gigabytes as quickly as possible and then be capped?
The fact of matter is that consumer internet access is priced according to statistical usage (read: normal). If you want to peak your link 24/7/365 you should buy a service that allows you to do so, but be aware such a product cannot be "consumer" priced.
You get what you pay for, always have, always will..
iSCSI is NOT far superior to SCSI, or fibrechannel. iSCSI has massive issues related to deterministic latency, and computational cost of processing TCP/IP at gigabit speeds. You may see some growth in the of iSCSI in the workgroup segment, but I don't see iSCSI replacing fc/scsi in the near future for mission critical computing.
Slashdot Mirror
You are. If they are really serious about this, it's going to mean massive investments for serviceproviders. One thing is collecting customer statistics about source/destination and type of traffic - actually sniffing it, and sending it to central location(FBI/CIA whatever) is an entirely different matter that requires special hardware. E.g. a Juniper monitoring PIC (special expensive linecard for special expensive routers used by serviceproviders) doesn't come cheap, and the money has to come from somewhere - either from increased ISP fees, or increased tax in the unlikely event that the government is going to foot the bill.
A lot of the comments here is fairly negative to certifications, just remember that these are probably NOT the people that are going to hire you anyway. The way I see it, it is nothing WRONG with certifications, and if nothing else, it shows you have some drive, and is willing to put in an effort to read some books and go through the hassle getting certified.
If you're really good at something, but don't bother to get the certifications - in my eyes it shows that you're either a) not that good, or b) lazy. Note that I don't imply that ceritifications mean that you're really good. I was laid off from my former job, and my certifications (MCSE, everything cisco including CCIE) helped me get a new one. They didn't get me the job, but they helped.
Also don't ignore the fact that a lot of companies doing business with cisco (resellers, silver/gold partners) are REQUIRED to employ a certain amount of certified people, so you might want to check out cisco premier resellers in your area.
In a pressed marked, everything counts, and I don't see why certifications shouldn't.
As a Cisco CCIE and working for a ISP, I will as politely as I can ask you: what have you been smoking? Weighted Fair Queuing does not solve any bandwidth issues. What it DOES do is to give priority to "streams" with few/small packets, making interactive traffic/voip perform better on congested low speed links (typically 10mbit or less).
However, it does not make a saturated Gigabit Ethernet(or similar) backbone link filled with kazaa traffic less saturated, and the only way to overcome saturated links is to upgrade the links, at a price.
SOME ISP's rate-limit P2P traffic to give their backbone links a breather, but that again rises the question of unlimited. Do you prefer to have your link limited so that you can download X gigabytes over a month, or do you prefer to download X gigabytes as quickly as possible and then be capped?
The fact of matter is that consumer internet access is priced according to statistical usage (read: normal). If you want to peak your link 24/7/365 you should buy a service that allows you to do so, but be aware such a product cannot be "consumer" priced. You get what you pay for, always have, always will..
iSCSI is NOT far superior to SCSI, or fibrechannel. iSCSI has massive issues related to deterministic latency, and computational cost of processing TCP/IP at gigabit speeds. You may see some growth in the of iSCSI in the workgroup segment, but I don't see iSCSI replacing fc/scsi in the near future for mission critical computing.