On Monday 12 September 2005 09:08, Tillman Hodgson wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 09:08:51AM -0500, Martin wrote:
> > If you are only going to do Two exams, then:-
> >
> > Junior level either:-
> >
> > BSD System Administrator
> > BSD Server Administrator
> >
> > Senior level either:-
> >
> > BSD System Engineer
> > BSD Server Engineer
>
> You won't be able to use a designation with the word "engineer" in the
> title in some countries. For that reason I'd avoid it.


Really...almost everywhere I have been  and read about recognises the 
distinction between a  'degreed Engineer'  and an IT 
brand-certification-engineer knowing that the IT engineer  engineers 
(creates) the server, network or whatever.

Novell certified Network Engineer
Certified Novell Engineer
Master certified Novell Engineer
Cerified Banyan Engineer
Compaq accredited systems Engineer
Certified unicenter Engineer
Microsoft certified systems Engineer

Ever heard of them ?


> I do prefer the word "system" to "server" as it aligns better with the
> work that SAGE is doing to standardize the terminology.


Words have meanings.  Some are context specific like  'engineer'.

System denotes a bunch of components.  Useful if you wanted to amalgamate 
network/server/workstation (or desktop) into one.

Being accurate is important.

If people can't differentiate between a  'degreed engineer'  and an IT 
certified engineer that is pretty poor but the fix is to change it eg. 
specialist or expert


> I see both the junior and the senior level cert as being about system
> administration, albeit at different levels of complexity. Nobody wants a
> cert with the name "junior" in the title but "BSD System Administrator,
> level 1" or "level 2" (as the LPI has done) seems to be both accurate in
> description and acceptable to those attempting to get the
> certification.
>
> -T


I never liked junior either.

I would still like there to be Three core groups

a)   administrator (server)  - minimum knowledge level - looks after the 
servers that have already been installed/configured/tested by the 'expert' - 
adds/deletes/modifies users, email, mailing lists, web pages, basic X etc. 
assists and learns from the expert etc.

b)   expert (server)  -  selects hardware, configures lvm, raid, selects and 
installs applications, security audits, backup configuration/planning, medium 
level X etc.

c)  Workstation/Desktop expert - High level X, window managers, works with 
users on notebook/server issues, sound, graphics, USB devices, printers, 
everything to do with installing, maintaining, fixing and upgrading 
workstations/desktops etc. 


I really hope these discussions crystalise into  'real world'  certs.  The 
larger the organization, the more these tasks are split due to workload and 
even though there are overlaps, we need clear, precise objectives for BSD 
certifications.
Basically we need to be innovative and be better than the current certs. 
So many I have studied, have design, which is an engineering function, in at 
the most basic level where commands, command options, application knowledge,  
and support of users is the core critical need for an administrator.

Feel free to critique  :-)

Regards...Martin
_______________________________________________
BSDCert mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/bsdcert

Reply via email to