Hi Bryan,
But a prerequisite exam about nss and pam and other stuff would be nice.
So why don't they go into the "base" LPI 301 exam that covers
authentication, directory and naming services that _all_ others rely on?
I think we agree on the most part but didn't choose well the words. I
don't think all authentication should be a pre-requisite because a
Samba-based network (with mostly windows clients) would not need to use
NIS and LDAP, but would be enough with winbind. I agree that using LDAP
and integrating samba with it would be preferable, but I also thing
mastering LDAP is still very very hard and it should not be a requisite
for a level-3 samba or unix admin. Maybe LDAP should be another
certification track per se.
But i'd put ldap,nis and nfs separate from Samba,
And I'd put select Samba portions, including services such as winbindd
and nmbd as well as the Samba LDAP schema, in the authentication,
directory and naming exam as well. You just "draw the line" where each
set of objectives cross from auth/dir/name into file/print to separate
the two focuses of the two exams.
I don't think the lines should be drawn around authentication and file
services.
Maybe my understanding about Level-3 objectives is wrong, please correct
me if I am wrong, but a LPIC-3-Samba should have value per se and not
just as part of an "enterprise certification". If this is right, the
LPIC-3-Samba should not require things from NFS and NIS (and whatever)
but should require aything you need to build reliable samba servers.
So I propose a "general" exam for naming and authentication, that would
be a prerequisite for both Security, Samba and NFS/AFS tracks. And LDAP
would be either a fourth track or an add-on ("level 4") to the Samba and
NFS tracks.
so candidates could choose a samba-track or a linux-only
track (or maybe both).
So what about that "both" option?
And I'm sorry, that "both" option is _very_real_ in the Enterprise.
So just take both tracks. Just like you can be both a MCSE and a MCSD.
How are you going to address files shared out both NFS and SMB?
Do you now add some of those questions to each exam?
I don't think there's enough issues relating to sharing using both
services at the same time to justify testing for this on the exams.
However, we can_not_ address _all_ concepts in _all_ exams. So that's
where a dedicated "Security" exam would augment, including:
- Access Controls like MAC, RBAC, etc... beyond standard DAC
- Auditing and Monitoring like Log Analysis, Snort, etc...
- Cryptography like key/cert management, etc... beyond standard setup
- Etc...
I like this idea, but it would be abother certification track and not a
pre-requisite for a Samba or NFS admin.
[]s, Fernando Lozano
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
