John ,
On Jun 15, 2006, at 9:05 AM, John H Terpstra wrote:
I've been watching this discussion develop. Whether we like it or not,
Microsoft entered the networking game late. They currently own the
jack-pot.
If we want to use LPIC-3-Samba certification to help take some of that
jack-pot value and move it to a Linux or open source world, then we
must
learn how their technology works - at least sufficiently to bridge
two very
different worlds.
Right on, I see the Samba exam as being something that tests your
ability to properly bridge or integrate the two environments, 'cause
let's face it, Samba exists so that it can help other systems
interface or replace or emulate etc. as or to a Windows system.
I taught the Microsoft certification courses and believe that they
provide
significant value to someone who wants to master the Windows admin
role.
Training alone can not impart experience - that can only come from
the school
of hard knocks and bumps. This is also the case with Linux. A
certification
program can establish no more than a certain knowledge level - if the
examination process covers sufficient essential ground _and_ does
not bias
the outcome.
I too taught the courses for many years, and I could break it down
into two camps of technical level, the top level of people were those
who weren't happy with just the regular information, courses and
documentation, but had found out about the Resource Kit books and
tools and read them, had graduated on to reading large portions of
Technet and in general tried to find out everything they could, and
then there were the folks to whom the course would be the penultimate
of their learning about the product, other than the amount of OJT
they picked up while working on the product.
I would submit that our folks who will make it to the LPIC3 Samba
exam would be like the first set, they'll know a LOT about it because
to have made it this far, and to decide that they want to take this
exam they'll have had to pick up a LOT of Windows knowledge from
working around it.
Windows certifications generally got the most out of Samba training
- if they
worked at it. Those who undertook Samba training without prior Windows
networking knowledge generally complained that the course should be
twice as
long.
I had the same experience with the LPIC 1 boot camps, I talked with
the majority of the people who came through before they got to the
class and warned/cautioned them it was something they needed to do
the pre work for, and the majority of them did, and had a MUCH better
time for it. By the same token, some people will not do the pre work
if you recorded it for them or read it to them, so we have to just
build the exam to test the knowledge that's required for the cert,
and perhaps point out a lot of links to good information about how
Windows Networking functions.
But it is necessary to for a Samba admin
to know his/her way around the network configuration tools for the
Microsoft
Windows server and workstation products.
Yeah, nothing is worse than a bigoted Microsoft technician who hates
Linux and Unix and yet has to work around and with it for his job,
unless it's an equally bigoted OSS person who can't be bothered to
learn Windows technologies because they are "dirty" and
"proprietary". I think the majority will address the issue as
something they need to know to be an overall admin for servers of
different varieties and not get all emotional about it. Nothing
like being rejected for a position because you needed to know
something about Windows to do your primary Linux/Unix job to wise
someone up in a big hurry!
I recommend that this discussion should define very carefully what the
certification means.
Does LPIC-3-Samba mean that someone can just configure Samba and
know their
way around Samba configuration files and tools, or does it mean
that they are
"competent" to handle and solve the majority of real-world problems
involving
MS Windows servers and workstations in admixture with Samba?
It has to be the latter, the former is almost negligent and we want
the cert to have a balanced view and maximum value to the examinee
and the industry.
Additionally, does LPIC-3-Samba mean someone is competent to
migrate a Windows
network to a Samba-based network? What about Samba-based back to
Windows NT4
or Active Directory?
Solid point, I would recommend it be a Migration/Integration focus,
and that would be one way only. I feel no responsibility
*whatsoever* to teach/certify someone about how to migrate from Samba
to AD.
In other words, it is necessary to take a position on what the
measurable
value of certification must be before setting its bounds. Emotion
has no
place in certification. Either LPIC-3-Samba certification means
someone has
demonstrated sufficient understanding to be put in charge of the
train _or_
they should not get behind the wheel!
-- Bryan
P.S. Remember, even Microsoft has a _separate_ desktop
certification in
the MSDST -- Desktop and Support Technician.
The Microsoft desktop certification has little to do with network
configuration. Windows networking is covered over a range of
training courses
and certification programs - each of which has its own examination.
It's even worse now, it's no longer one MS course per exam, they are
mixed up some now so that you can't just take a single course and get
a single exam out of the way.
We may well need more than one certification exam. Sigh! Such is life.
I can't see making a MS cert a prereq, but having the knowledge that
cert should hopefully (then he woke up) represent would be a prereq
to the cert.
Again, my hope is that we all remember that this is a Level 3 cert,
and by this time people should have a good working set of networking
skills and not be a Window Virgin, very damn few positions I have
seen could be so isolated in todays networking environment, perhaps
at an ISP or some large corporation's Server group, but surely not in
the SMB or middle tier market.
Ross
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
