On Thursday 15 June 2006 00:12, Dimitrios Bogiatzoules, Product Developer wrote:
> "Given the nature of the matter, LPIC-3 Samba specialists are > working in world dominated by 2 different operating systems, Linux > and Microsoft Windows (R). Administrators that are maintaining a > mixed network with Samba as File Server with Microsoft Windows (R) > clients may need to hold more than the LPIC-3 Samba certificate. > So, for example, employers may ask also for an MCSE certificate in > addition to the LPIC-3 Samba, in order to be sure that the > administrator will be able to maintain server and client." > > I'd like to hear some opinions about this topic because it may have > influence on the task list. For example we proposed a "configure > clients" as a task but in most cases the clients are machines > running windows, so that it could make sense to ask for an MC?? > certificate for that tasks... I'm of the opinion that "configure clients" is outside the scope of Samba, which should be confined to server side tasks and common clients which run on Linux (smbclient, kioslaves, gnome-vfs). Keep in mind that we don't expect an Apache admin to be able to configure IE6. I think I understand the reasoning behind the original post, and it sure does look attractive at first glance. It's also problematic in that our cert depends on another cert completely outside our control and influence. My input at this point is to restrict L3 (Samba) to just Samba and let it stand alone. Leave it up to the candidate and the market to supplement it with an MCSE if they so choose. -- If only me, you and dead people understand hex, how many people understand hex? Alan McKinnon alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za +27 82, double three seven, one nine three five _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
