Hi Bryan,
> "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!" The purpose of having Samba is connecting Windows clients to a non-Windows server. And that's the reason many companies are deploying Linux and Samba. So a LPIC-3-Samba certification is about building a robust infrastructure for serving Windows clients from Linux servers, nothing more. This can't be done without server-side (Linux) AND client-side (Windows) skills, so both have to be tested. I can't see how this devaluates the LPIC-3, and why noone would hire such a professional. Of course, if they want Windows servers they won't want LPICP's. But if they want Linux servers they'll need LPICP-3-Samba. Having LPIC-3-Samba does not precludes you from having LPIC-3-LDAP and LPIC-3-whatever. Say you have dozen file servers, all nicely integrated on a ldap-based infrastructure. You'll need many more samba experts to keep this network functioning than ldap experts to manage the central infrastruture. And you'll have lots of troubleshooting and capacity planning that are specific for samba, not touching anything related do OpenLDAP or Fedora Directory (former Netscape Directory). The other way is also true, you'll have lots of work related to the directory servers that are not affected by samba. So you have positions for both kinds of experts, and you would also like to have someone who masters both. That said, I think it will be bad if we launch LPIC-3 with only LDAP and Samba exams. Taking an exam that does not grants certification has no value for professionals and employees. I don't see a strong need for professional with both expertises, but this may be my local environment only (Brazil). I know LPI has few resources to develop and deploy many tests, but shouldn't we launch at least three LPIC-3 exams instead of only two, so candidates can effectively choose their track on the LPIC-3 program? > > 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. These are two different beasts. A&R does not implies virtualization, and virtualization is not only about A&R. You won't be able to fold and market everything under general categories. because employees look for specifc (product-based) skills. And sometimes the product-specific skills are so big they justify an exam and certification per se. []s, Fernando Lozano _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
