Fernando Lozano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >(non-exclusive) LDAP coverage is mandatory for at least one of these exams.
>
> So LPI thinks a LPICP-3 needs strong LDAP skills?
LPI thinks that one of the first exams should cover LDAP. Not nothing but
LDAP, though.
I really think that Bryan is heading in the right direction on this, BTW.
> >Did you mean NSS or NIS above? Or both?
>
> Both, because I don't think NIS is complex or visible enough to get an exam
> of its own. But maybe NFS would need one, I don't know if it could be folded
> into the "core" exam together with Kerberos.
I agree that Kerberos should be investigated, if possible. The marketing
research claimed it was not useful to cover it but I'd like the JTA to tell
me that. I can't believe that a real enterprise wouldn't consider it
(although, some don't). Heck, some people are doing LDAP _and_ Kerberos
together:
http://www.ofb.net/~jheiss/krbldap/howto.html
And that's part of Bryan's point, too, if I may put words in his mouth. The
reason for organizing the exam into an 'authentication' and 'file/print'
format where more than one technology can be covered does a couple of things.
The most important being the fact that an enterprise level IT person
shouldn't be a one trick pony. They should be aware of, if not experienced
in, multiple solutions.
> I think this makes both exams get too wide a scope. But I guess we can have
> only two wikis for tasks and objective development and later on decide if we
> should split or not the exams. Anyway I am all in whatever LPI decides it's
> the best course of action. I don't pretend to understand all needs from all
> custmers all around the world. I can only contribute with my limited view
> from m Brazillian customers. :-)
That's all we're asking :) I'd rather have a task list that _is_ too all
encompassing from which we can extract more than one exam (or at least pieces
of additional exams) than miss the mark and not end up with any complete
exams.
> >For now, it's 'authentication' and 'file/print' exams.
>
> May I insist there should be three exams to start with? Because If we start
> with only two and two are required, people will understand the two initial
> exams *are* LPIC-3 and will get confused when we add new exams without
> creating a new cetificaton level or brand.
That's where a more complete LPIC-3 roadmap comes in. Let's get this JTA
launched ASAP (we can't do that until we have complete task lists) and then
we can spend the summer discussing it.
Regards,
--
g. matthew rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> starnix, toronto, ontario, ca
phone: 647.722.5301 x242 gpg id: EF9AAD20
http://www.starnix.com professional linux services & products
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
