[BSDcert] Re: cert semantics
mikel.king at ocsny.com
Thu Mar 17 17:00:39 EST 2005
Jerry B. Altzman wrote:
>(aside to Mikel: your formatting and gmail don't play nicely together...)
This is weird cause I've selected plain text (not even both) for the
formatting and now this is the second time someone is mentioning, this.
>Why "cheapen" a cert by having something that is basically wallpaper?
>Is there an MS "user" cert? (I don't know.)
>Ask yourself: what is this *for*? What do I want to *certify*? Who would care?
True but to be a standard windows user you don't need to know any cli.
As I said it's a nice to have certainly not a requirement.
>> The whole reason I drafted this concept was to ultimately reduce the work
>>load drafting up these certs. Since the first block will be slow to change
>>it should require the lowest amount of effort to maintain once established.
>>This should also in turn free up people who are say experts in security or
>>db stuff to maintain these fast paced areas of expertise. This could also
>>help to reduce the duplication of effort and overlap.
>Well, instead, let's think of ourselves of consumers of the certified.
>If someone has a 'basic' level cert, what the heck are we expecting
>them to know? Installation? Package management?
>If I came to you and said I was "Jr. BSD Admin", how much leeway would
>you give me?
>What questions should I skip in the interview? What should I expect
>you to know coming in right away?
>I'm kinda harping on the semantics of this, since precious few certs
>carry any real weight. (The CCIE is an exception, as are, for example,
>the actuarial exams and subsequent chartering).
While I do agree that there are too many water soluble certs out there
which is why I tend to not put much faith in any vendor specified cert.
>> No I don't think so, but that is some thing that would set these apart from
>>vendor specific certs. If the jr passes the test why not? Of course this all
>>depends upon how the certs are defined. I am just tossing out one scenario.
>I'm just tossing out a criticism of it, and making an alternative
>suggestion: no additional certs can be piled on a junior BSD cert.
We are talking about core competencies here. Neither the Jr nor Sr admin
would be a CCIE level on it's own. But with the appropriate addons they
could be I guess. I mean differences between the two could probably be
things like kernel patching and compiling, disk geometry and things like
>>I don't see any reason why not. When I was in the
>>military I held many advance certifications at a jr level. For instance an
>>E4 Electronics Technician could hold a Crypto Cert, that his E10 ETCS
>>supervisor does not. The Senior Chief is clearly a top level cert he
>>certainly gets paid enough, but he doesn't need to be certified on the
>>crypto equipment to manage those who are and work on it daily. Does it mean
>>that he couldn't work on said equipment if the need arose? Of course he
>>could, that's what tech manuals are for.
>Granted, but those are somewhat independent certs, no? I mean, we're
>talking about "advanced such-and-such ON BSD" -- there's nothing that
>says a Jr. BSD sysadmin couldn't also get his OCP, or CCIE, or
>> -- Cheers, Mikel King Optimized Computer Solutions, INC 39 West Fourteenth
Optimized Computer Solutions, INC
39 West Fourteenth Street
New York, NY 10011
You may like them. You will see. You may
like them in a tree.
How do you spell cooperation? Pessimists use
each other, but optimists help each other.
Collaboration feeds your spirit, while
competition only stokes your ego. You'll
find the best way to get along.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 347 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.nycbug.org/pipermail/bsdcert/attachments/20050317/8644eee3/attachment.vcf
More information about the BSDCert