Dimitrios Bogiatzoules, LPI Product Developer wrote: > I thought it was rather clear, that we are talking about 2 first exams > not only one: > https://group.lpi.org/cgi-bin/publicwiki/view/Examdev/LPIC-3#First_Exams
And I will re-iterate I think the best 2 exams to start with are: - Auth/Dir/Name - File/Print You cover how you access, authenticate and map system/user/group objects across an enterprise in the first one. Then you cover how you access, authorize and map file resource objects between file servers and clients in the second one. Otherwise, you're going to be covering a _lot_ of things redundantly. > I agree with Fernando that the exam proposed by Bryan is to wide and not > a necessary core exam for LPIC-3. And I say I'm simplifying it. Not only to start by giving us 2 exams to put Samba questions in, but also to not have to recover the same concepts on auth/dir/name as well as file/print when it comes to NFS, Apache, Database, etc... later on. > IMHO there won't be a core LPIC-3 exam because the specialisations are > too different. To me, authorizing, directing and naming objects on a network are _core_ to _all_ other facilities. If we start hashing that at each exam level, we'll have a pretty "cookbook" exam that only addresses simplistic and _non_ "real-world" solutions. Like standalone Samba servers with only Windows clients. Or possibly Samba server that only authentication with native ADS servers. We're going to create an exam that does _nothing_ to prove that administrators know how to do the first thing with UNIX/Linux clients, etc... > Right now we should hurry and get the proposed tasks for the surveys > done for > https://group.lpi.org/cgi-bin/publicwiki/view/Examdev/LPIC-3LDAP > (no tasks entered at all) Unfortunately, I can't built the LDAP exam with this setup. I'm going to build a generic LDAP exam that has _no_ "real-world" application. Unless, of course, you want me to turn the LDAP exam into a generic auth/dir/name support exam. I can do that, and make a LDAP exam that is "real-world" but focuses on a lot of things outside of LDAP. And that includes tying in Winbind, Samba schema, NFS automounter maps, etc... > and > https://group.lpi.org/cgi-bin/publicwiki/view/Examdev/LPIC-3Samba > (a lot of task entered but the client issue is still under discussion) > If you look at the (short) history of the wiki pages you will see that > it started as File Sharing Services ;-). > I agree that at the moment other file services do not make sense: we > shouldn't certify anything that employers do not need. I honestly thing statements like that is going to flush LPIC-3 down the toilet. I must live in a fantasy world where people have to support more than just Windows clients, and they don't like to just "turn on" NFS where it trusts any system in an IP address range and does no further authentication and authorization. If I'm Microsoft, I honestly look at this program and say ... "Why get Linux certified if you just know how to connect Windows clients and nothing else? Our native Windows server solution supports Windows clients better!" And they'd be 100% correct. I'd hire a MCSE with a bit of UNIX/Linux experience and have him put in a Windows Server instead of a LPIC-3 that only covers Samba. The Windows Server will support my Windows clients better, and I can get NIS/NFS out of Services for UNIX with a full, more manageable Kerberos/LDAP back-end with ADS. Yes, this might seem a bit of "devil's advocate," but it's my honest, professional opinion -- I have to concede it. At this point, I can only assume this focus on the exams is being driven by marketing by using the project names like Samba, LDAP, etc... or possibly due to the fact that some people believe "directory services is hard," etc... I honestly can't believe people believe only Windows clients are being used with UNIX/Linux servers out there. > In > https://group.lpi.org/cgi-bin/publicwiki/view/Examdev/LPIC-3FutureExams > you'll see that XEN is already proposed by Ralph Dehner. > Well, as far as I'm concerned, I'd say yes but I'm not LPI :-D Let's > hear what Matt has to say, too! Again, I recommended we look at an "Availability and Redundancy" exam. We can cover a lot of concepts. > What you describe above is the main idea of the Level 3 certification. > At that level an employee would be (almost) always specialised in one > technology area and we will offer the certification for that areas. If > one masters all Level 3 exams, then we may need to create a Guru > certificate.... How you authenticate objects, list resources or other network objects and how you find out where those nodes are can't be any more elementary to any and all services on a network. Shouving that into a Samba exam with a Windows-only focus and -- from an enterprise standpoint -- either standalone or native ADS-only viewpoint -- seems like the wrong message to send. Something that a LDAP exam won't be able to address without some coordination. A basic enterprise auth/dir/name that should be covering things that the Samba exam will be very limited in. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://thebs413.blogspot.com ---------------------------------------------------------- The existence of Linux has far more to do with the breakup of AT&T's monopoly than anything Microsoft has ever done. _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
