Ask Slashdot: Are Any Certifications Worth Going For?

An anonymous reader writes: I am an IT professional in my 30s and have had some form if IT employment for the last 15 years. I've worked my way from technical support to IS manager, but my career seems to have stalled. I have a fancy 4-year degree in Information Systems (I was never much of a programmer) from an actual college, and a good deal of real-world experience combined with reading the odd technical book here and there to keep abreast of what's going on in the world of tech, but what I don't have is any certifications. None.

When I was a poor student fresh from college, I decided that certifications were a waste of money, since the jobs I was applying for at the time didn't care about them, and the tests were several hundred dollars each. Now, it seems most jobs I see listed want some certifications, and I suspect HR systems are weeding out resumes that don't have the correct alchemical formula of certifications.

So my question is: are any certifications now worth it? If so, where do I start? I will probably stick to the track I'm on (I'm better at managing than developing). Going to classes might be an option, but I'd prefer to be able to self-study if possible to work around being on-call constantly (and, to be blunt, classes are expensive). I don't want to stump up for a class only to find out I don't actually like the class or the material or the certification isn't actually what I thought it was.

Comments

practical-based certs hold their value

[scubacuda]

I would argue that certs with practicals (CCIE, JNCIE, RHCE, etc) tend to hold their value much better than those that can simply be gotten by taking tests.

Re:practical-based certs hold their value

[ruckc]

I agree with this. I just took the RHSA, and I can honestly say that having book knowledge wouldn't allow you to pass if you've never done some of the tasks before.

Practical certs like GIAC help and hold value

[UnderAttack]

If you are serious about infosec certifications, check out GIAC (http://www.giac.org) . The certs are very applied and test practical knowledge (e.g. they are open book... no need to test how well you can memorize stuff). CISSP is good to get you started in the field.

Re:Just Lie

[bobbied]

Just lie about what certs you have, in 12 years I've never had a single company ever ask me for proof of any of my dozens of certs.

Really bad advice. NEVER lie to a prospective employer. Sure, it may get you an interview and you might be able to BS your way into a job by claiming stuff you don't officially have, but is it worth it?

Is it worth it to be sitting on pins and needles waiting for them to check up on you and fire you? The IT world is generally pretty small in most areas. Unless you live in an area where there are a LOT of employers, lying to get a job is a reputation killer. You may think you can just walk away and get away with it, but don't be so sure.

However, the best reason to not lie is that it is not ethical. ALWAYS do the ethical thing. Stay above the fray, tell the truth and get the certifications for real. It may take longer and be harder, but in the long run it will be worth it.

There is a reason for this!

[s.petry]

The multiple guess tests show no practical application for knowledge. I have met plenty of people with certifications that are worthless, and the people with them were just as useless.. sometimes with dozens of these tests. These people were duped into spending tons of cash to get these certificates and had no practical knowledge. Knowing how to enter a netmask in someone's GUI does not mean you understand what a netmask is, or what a broadcast address is, or how to calculate either from the other.

RHCE, CEH, etc.. require practical knowledge. Having work experience can be, and usually is, enough to compensate for the lack of a certificate. The more experience you have the less essential a certification is. I have been in the business for nearly 3 decades, and quite honestly I'm never asked about certificates. Go back even 15 years and people did ask, and I did have some certificates. Today, I'm never asked and have a steady stream of requests to review job offers and even suggest candidates.

Re:There is a reason for this!

[mysidia]

What the vendor calls the device is more about what the primary intended place for the device is on the network; it is a reflection on the "standard" configuration of the device, or at least the defaults.

The problem with this assessment "Switches use ASICs; routers don't" is it is only true for low-end devices. The only way you are getting away without ASICs is if you are in a small-business, branch office, or Enterprise WAN with little traffic.

Switches require ASICs, but "routers" need them too. Routers typically need more advanced ASICs, since they need to look at Layer 3 network prefixes, not just a simple list of MAC addresses for L2 bridging.

The Cisco ASR routers use ASICs extensively, ditto for 76xx routers; in fact, they are exclusively used for forwarding, there is very little or no software-based switching through a high-end router. If a condition occurs where you run out of hardware TCAM or lose CEF and revert to non-ASIC-based software switching, it will be a very bad day indeed.

Juniper M/T/MX series edge routers are the same way. All forwarding is done in a separate ASIC-based hardware forwarding plane. Packets are not interpreted or forwarded by software. Even firewall rules, QoS policies, etc, are handled by ASICs on a reasonably high end router.

Once upon a time there were cases where you needed to upgrade PBB cards or policy feature cards on routers to add to policy management/access list functionality. These are definitely hardware-driven functions.

Common Layer 3 switches in fixed access configs have similar capability in some respects but more limited featuresets and limited capacity for table sizes, typically; you often don't have quite the same IP policy management features as on a full blown router; some of the L3 switches don't even have decent QoS (which is terrible).

Also if you need to take a full BGP table; you are not going to want to use a fixed-configuration Layer 3 access switch to do that --- since it probably lacks the memory, and even if it had the memory, generally there will be no supervisor redundancy.

The requirement to support a huge IP forwarding table, which requires extra memory and CPU, is what an Edge router needs on a multihomed network.

So there are clearly devices that specialize in being better edge routers than switches.