11-03-2009 11:09 AM
I'm trying to determine if I want to go the ER or the M series path for the JNCI[ASE] certifications and I can't find anything that lists some basic information regarding the major differences between the two. I've read the descriptions of the certs, but they sound very similar. I'm slightly leaning toward the ER track since there's no 'P' step in the path, but I wanted to check to see if there was some kind of nice chart or table that compared the 2 paths.
Solved! Go to Solution.
11-03-2009 12:20 PM
It's my understanding that M-series covers IS-IS what isn't the case with ER. On top of that advanced BGP configs like route reflectors and confederiations. That's all I know about it....
01-27-2010 06:13 AM
There are actually several differences between the exams. The JNCIE-M has SP-centric topics, such as MPLS, MPLS VPNs, IGPs including IS-IS, BGP from a SP perspective, etc. The JNCIE-ER has enterprise-centric topics, VRRP, IPSec, GRE, OSPF, etc.
You can check out the differences in objectives here, they're noticeable when you line them up side by side:
Since the IE exams follow on from the JNCIA/S/P exams, you can also get some more info on the differences by checking the objectives for the lower exams.
01-27-2010 09:26 AM
Thanks for the response. I was hoping that there would be more information. I'll probably end up just doing the "easier" route (ie. less certs --> ER path)
I personally wouldn't say the "easier" route is the one with less certs. In fact, one of the things I like about the M/T series track is that it is a more natural progression and allows one to gauge their understanding of the topics in an ordered fashion, before moving on to the next higher layer certification.
The JNCIP-M exam would be mutually beneficial to those who are pursuing either the JNCIE-M or the JNCIE-ER exam, as the focus on IGPs and BGPs will be infinitely valuable in either of those tracks.
The ER track is going to be undergoing some changes in the near future...
04-06-2010 09:36 AM
The ER track is focused on the challenges associated with an enterprise, meaning a large company who isn't an ISP. The M-series track is based on testing the tasks relevant to an ISP. You won't cover ISIS in the ER track as it is today, you also won't need to worry about things like Layer 3/2 VPNs, MPLS, Ibgp confederations etc. Those things are reserved for the ISP side (M-series). The ER track focuses more on redundancy, tunneling, encryption, complex nat and stateful firewalls and site to site routing. Both tracks are very challenging but the certifications yield a tremendous amount of respect in the industry. Basically it depends on where you wish to hang your hat, ISP routing or Enterprise routing.
Check out these links for full descriptions of each track:
Hope this helps!
Exam Developer / Proctor
04-06-2010 09:38 AM
We will be changing the tracks between now and the end of 2010. Once we do all 3 Junos related tracks will line up symetrically, with the same exam levels for all 3 tracks.
Exam Developer / Proctor
04-06-2010 09:39 AM
Fewer certs, yes. Easier...I wouldn't be so sure. I found the ER track more difficult, partially because I came from a service provider background.
Exam Developer / Proctor
05-14-2010 12:32 AM
My biggest complain is JNCIP-M is prerequisite for JNCIE-M. If someone is willing to challenge JNCIE-M directly, why they have to pass a lab at professional level? certs and labs cost lot of money and time. Is Juniper considering direct path to JNCIE-M?
05-14-2010 03:39 AM - edited 05-18-2010 03:02 AM
I think you have the acronyms backwards but I'll take a stab at the question.
I am not associated at all with Juniper or any Juniper education provider, but I do have a masters degree and teach in an undergraduate college program in a humanities field. These two exams are testing different areas of learning.
The written exam is designed to find out if you have a breadth of knowledge about a subject. It tests you ability to cover a wide area and know details within each of the individual silos of required knowledge. We use these types of tests to make sure students have covered all four corners of required knowledge for full success in a subject.
Practical exams are the test of application of knowledge. We know from experience that there are some students that can learn all the theory but cannot practice the craft. By having practical exams we make sure that the student can apply the knowledge in the way we need them to practice. However, practical exams are by there very nature limited in scope. You cannot cover all four corners of the subject in anything approaching a reasonsalbe time frame. So we need to have the written basic knowledge exams to be sure the practice is standing on a firm foundation and not just specific knowledge of certain things.
05-18-2010 12:17 AM
JNCIP-M is a hands on lab exam and prerequisite for JNCIE-M which is also a performance based exam. All I am asking is whether Juniper considering allowing candidates to try JNCIE-M lab directly after JNCIS-M written exam.
Check the URL for more information on the SP JNCIE track.
Can anyone from Juniper care to comment?
05-18-2010 03:00 AM - edited 05-18-2010 03:02 AM
Sorry for my confusion.
I'd have to agree with you on this one. In reading the descriptions again of these two practical tests I would say they are measuring different skill sets.
In training sessions I have heard the JNCIP-M described as getting 8 factory default devices and building out a diagram handed to you from scratch. While the JNCIE-M is being handed a diagram and configured system that has problems that one must troubleshoot and fix. These are different skill sets and frequently enough different jobs that I would say the tests could be decoupled without any major issues.
And these practical exams are pretty expensive so if you don't need to demonstrate the initial build skill set for the current job requirement it would be a major barrier.
You should attend the live chat on May 26 and submit this question in advance for the certification program folks to think about and respond to firstname.lastname@example.org