A Novell Linux Specialist?

richardeholder asks: "Our Novell partners differentiate themselves in the marketplace by promoting their areas of expertise or specializations; this allows their customers to know what their skill sets are and what they can reasonably expect these partners to provide for them. As we embrace Linux, we would like to extend the title of 'Linux specialist' to partners who merit it. Before we move forward on this initiative, we would like to ask the Linux community for guidance on what should constitute a Linux specialist. Should we require certifications such as LPI and the RHCE/RHCT, or are there other more valuable ways of demonstrating Linux competency?"

Comments

certification requirements?

[sl0ppy]

there's the obvious one -- how many anti-microsoft comments you can get onto slashdot during one day.

but, all kidding aside, what's the scope of the specialty?

o firewalls
o security
o script writing

or are we talking end-user support?

o kde
o gnome
o X configuration

there would also be the need for familiarization with common opensource apps, such as openoffice, gnumeric, kword, etc.

what exactly are we talking about?

Certification is important but..

[morelife]

Only one small part of it.

In the business climate, you should only be considered a "Linux specialist" if you have designed, deployed, maintained, or extended production Linux platforms in real life.

Additionally, there should be some track record, say over two years, of professional or technical services delivery either in Linux or another Operating Platform, UNIX, not Windows or Novell.

Finally and most importantly, should be able to provide at least two business references resulting from completed or ongoing projects.

All this would be Real [TM] as opposed to say, the Microsoft "Partner" thing where you need 2 MCPs on staff, a fee, and, uh, that's all.

To my mind, the successful business reference is the best certification anyone can have.

What do you mean?

[MisanthropicProggram]

The article isn't very specific - to me anyway. The article is vendor specific and if you want an OSS job you need to know generic issues:

Network security - ALL protocols (esp. TCP/IP)

Network Architecture

Platform Integration - including (yuk!) Windows

I don't want to be a TROLL, but it's working out that way. I need people who can put together a NETWORK - NOT be a vendor specific cooky cutter LAN. The more you know about everything (networking) the more it helps to justify hiring you.

I know, it's a CATCH 22 deal these days -(I used to be a coder - and I got sick of it.) There's a lot of us ex-techies who are now PHBs because we couldn't take ( or didn't want to deal with) the current climate in the IT industry and we know TRUE skills when we see them.

I don't even know if this is even on topic based on the article...

WTF?

Real linux specialisation

[too_bad]

Its sad that novell dumped their Unix division just when I joined them, and then
they are embracing Linux few years after I dumped them :)

That apart, I think if Novell is really serious about Linux and Linux specialists, please
do not follow RHCE or any other certification. You should identify what aspects
of linux concerns you most. Then identify the contributions made by the concerned
parties to this field. Also, IMHO, it is much more sensible to identify specialists with
their contributions to the open source community. Redhat certification is very
commercialised, and is for people entering Linux to prove their worth to the world.
What you are looking at is to identify real specialists, many of who may not even bother
to prove themselves to anybody, and their works speak for them.

Identify broad areas such as:
Linux Kernel (Accomplished in kernel development)
Linux Device (Someone who is a wizard in getting any device working on Linux)
Linux Installation (Someone who can troubleshoot all kinds of installation problems,
who knows, redhat, debian, gentoo and what not on the back of their palm)
Linux Application (Someone who specialises in applications, KDE/Gnome, etc.)
Linux Ultimate (Accomplished in all the areas)

Now come up with different titles such as Specialist, Master, Guru etc. These titles identify the
extent of their skills. A Linux Kernel Guru might indicate kernel developer whereas Linux Kernel Specialist
might refer to someone who is good at managing patches, troubleshooting the kernel, installing modules etc.

Of course, people who have not contributed to open source should be able to prove themself by either
working with Novell on some projects, or by taking some certification exams. I think it is necessary to differentiate the two categories.

Infact if Novell starts a centralised Linux forum to attract newbies and experts to discuss (like linuxquestions.org) it will be easy to identify the gurus by their contributions and newbie testimonials.

Hope this helps.

Two cents on certifications

[digitalhermit]

Very interesting question. Five years ago I would have said that certifications were about as useful a predictor of knowledge as swirling tea leaves in a cup. I've seen some really good MCSEs with a thorough knowledge of networking and their specialties and just as many who can't properly subnet a network. Five years ago, anyone who was seriously into Linux was *usually* a competent sysadmin in their own right and didn't need a piece of paper to prove it.

I think this has changed. There are a lot more people getting into Linux for the money than there has ever been before. This has upsides and downsides. Upside -- Linux is growing. Downside, it's no longer an arcane science. I can live with the downside though.

Alas, we peddle our skills to non-technical types who don't understand that a cram session and the ability to prepare for a test does not predict the knowledge of a consultant or future employee. They, for good or bad, use keyword filters or head hunter resume databases to choose candidates. Those who have magical letters on their resume get noticed. The rest, regardless of knowledge, get filtered out before ever being seen by a human.

So are Linux certifications a good thing? Maybe. If done right and don't end up as a certification mill as happened with the MCSE, then sure. They can help show a certain level of competency and could ensure that the certificate holder has the broad level of knowledge required to pass the test. In the next five years I'd expect that more executives will start asking for some certification anyway.

This will only work if the certification process in itself does not become an industry. The cost of taking the test should be low (under $150) but it must be difficult. Ideally it would include a practical, hands-on section instead of a bunch of multiple choice questions. The course work should be openly available and reflect not only real-world knowledge but some theoretical and philosophical aspects of using Linux.

Re:Two cents on certifications

[tyler_larson]

It's been my unfortunate experience that those whose titles contain the word "Certified" tend to lag far behind the rest of us in the industry. In school, the hackers studied Computer Science or Electrical Engineering and learned how to make computers work. The dropouts from these majors who just couldn't hack it (those who wanted the jobs but didn't have that special gift that lets you think like a computer) switched instead to "Information Systems" in the business school.

Instead of learning how to make a computer work, there they learned how to work a computer. I.e., they learned how to use the programs that we learned how to create. Their programming coursework was graded on effort rather than effectiveness. The program they wrote didn't have to work (or even compile), it just had to look right. And yet, interestingly enough, part of this particular university's I.S. program was to complete the MSCE coursework and obtain certification.

Now that's scary.

You may be thinking that this is nothing special--network administrators don't need to know how to write programs, right? Well, immagine hiring an MSCE who can't even write a working batch file--but who can at least recognize one 80% of the time! This gets even more complicated in the *NIX world, where customization means script writing. Certification requires you to have more or less the same understanding of computers as someone like me has of quantum physics: memorized well enough to pass the test, but not necessarily understood enough to remember it next week.

Those of us with real computer skills never bothered to take those certification tests because they cost money and meant nothing (after all, the CS and EE dropouts are all certified). Do I really want to be placed in the same catagory as THEM? Those of us real admins who are actually certified only did it so they could pass the resume word search.

And yet, it's useful to know who understands system administration and who doesn't. Certification was a stab at making such a devision. It's relied on heavily by HR departments everywhere, despite the fact that it means so little in practical terms, because the HR department doesn't know any better.

But the truth is, IT certification is a flawed system at its very core. Certification is based on book work and tests--neither of which you'll find in the real world. It doesn't have to be that way, and here's why:

IT Certification should work like Pilot Licensing

In order to fly an airplane, you need to know the books, but you also need to know how to fly--that means extensive practical knowledge that can be demonstrated to an examiner in an actual airplane thousands of feet above the earth. You can't cram for that test.

In the same way, certified Linux experts should be able to demonstrate practical skills, not just pass tests. For example, a Linux system administrator should be able to write (in just a few minutes) a simple script to parse 300 log files looking for a specific pattern. He should also be able to modify the boot scripts such that a custom executable runs after (and only if) the network is brought online, but before any remote login programs start. They should be able to customize a firewall, build and install a kernel module, examine a syslog file, and maybe even configure xdm. And the stuff that he demonstrates has to *actually work*, not just look right.

I dare say that any of the existing certification courses will have a well-thought-out curriculum, and probably cover all the necessary aspects of system administration. However, knowing the location and purpose of the rc.sysinit script doesn't mean that you know how to customize it to do your bidding. Certified engineers may know "what", "where", and even "why". But only experience and practice teaches you "how". And knowing how is a mandatory component of being useful.

Re:Requirements for a linux specialist:

[mnmn]

-Properly secure a firewall
This should really include configuring and using snort as the IDS part, full control over the iptables command and NOT using squid.

-Compile and install a kernel
And change the default screen color, use rdev and use ksymoops to locate the source of a crash and report it properly using the right bugreport email format to the exactly right group of people after having searched mailinglist archives and newsgroups for the same problem. Should also know enough C and about makefiles to correct function typos, comment out assert blocks and point the makefiles to the right libraries and include directories. Remember we're talking about a linux SPECIALIST, not a kiddie compiler.

-Configure the third button on thier mouse
No thats too tough

-Print to a Panasonic KXP-8410 printer in color
Too many Linux experts know little about printers. Many printers dont have drivers but can shared to smb/active directory users who do have the drivers. I strongly agree with this point.

-Make coffee that is restricted under OSHA guidelines
Or Quetta Tea. Doodh Pati. Not all geeks are scrawny white suburban californians.

-Recognize a minimum 8 of 10 random network cards by thier chipset number only
I would agree with this one, but you can have software-only experts too. I can tell ethernet, tokenring, fddi, atm, arcnet and isdn cards by their chipset, whether they will run under Linux/FreeBSD or Solaris, but I know guys who dont change their RAM but develop sophisticated KDE apps. There are niches...

-Understand the usefullness of the SysRq button
This can be learned in a day, so a specialist MUST know it.

-Install linux on any appliance that does not come with a keyboard or mouse
I am tempted to say he should be able to do the same with Solaris. Should also be able to install Plan9, Windows 2000 Advanced Server, Unixware, AIX and QNX on vmware images. (bochs would do)

-Setup a cron job to order pizza online
Too easy

-Pay a license fee to SCO
Uhh yeah. I'll hire such a person.

-Assemble a beowolf cluster which includes more than one type of gaming console
I'll bring a serious point here. This is not a practical skill. Just test for RHCE and that covers the really required sysadmin skills. Someone who is obsessed with gamebox clusters will not be interested in 99.9999 uptime. He will be playing unreal on the servers at night.

-Install a really cool kde/gnome/enlightenment theme
And get used to twm and CDE. Learn to enjoy the command line.

-Run desktops at no less than 1600x1200 resolution, native
Why? Use a real DEC VT520 dumb terminal.

-Name all boxen after sci-fi characters/objects
Come on geeks are more diverse than that. I havent seen star wars.

-Any cats owned must be named after cabling specifications
Or kernel header files, or commands.

-Adequate space must be reserved in all hardware racks for pizza boxes
One PC-XT case should be home to a hamster.

-Every system must glow at night. Server rooms should be scary
I second that. Modders for beautification are generally not all that interested in the software and are gamers.

Here are some others:

1. Take a 10GB ext3 or XFS or reiserfs partition full of data, and dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/partition block=512 count=4096, do the same for the END of the partition, and dd if=/dev/partition of=/tmp/file and give the file to him to recover as much data as possible.
2. Give him a Linux server and a Pentium1 with no harddisk but a bootable nic, and tell him to remote-boot windows95. Hire him for at least $80k if he can do that.
3. Act like a project manager and ask him to put all his work in project form on MS Project 2000, and submit weekly reports. Cause deliber