More work for the objective review (was Re: [lpi-discuss] Re: IPv6 in exam LPI ?)

Mark Miller mark.miller at
Wed Aug 17 23:30:27 EDT 2005

On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 22:32 -0400, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

> Whether IPv6, or SELinux, or Postfix, or any other component becomes 
> part of the LPIC exam should be determined by a formal process that is 
> open, well defined/understood, and based on a broad solicitation of 
> input. It requires a sample size substantially greater than the number 
> of participants in these threads.

This (and other) topics will be vetted by the formal objective review
process. At this stage I am just getting opinions about a topic brought
up by an interested person.  Each comment will be considered. Nothing is
being decided ad hoc.

> (Consider that the LPI of today has a significant advantage in this 
> regard over where it was when the first LPIC JTA was conducted. At the 
> beginning we could only appeal to the community at large. This time 
> there is a ready-made list of qualified admins worldwide -- existing 
> LPICs -- to survey on such issues.)

I also desire input from employers and the managers of those sysadmins.

> What optimally should come out of these discussions is a proper 
> formulation of the _questions_ to ask during the research phase of the 
> objective review. This is necessary, to separate technologies about 
> which knowledge is broadly considered to be _required_ for a sysadmin, 
> from that which is merely useful. We're certainly not going to resolve 
> those issues in limited-participation email threads and I suggest that 
> it's not too useful to even try at this point.

I don't think we are trying to formalize any position here. My goal is
to hear opinions. I am acutely aware of the limited scope of these lists
and we on the exam dev team are working hard to expand the inputs as
widely as possible.

> The LPI program should be a reflection, not a driver, of current best 
> practice by admins.

The Free Software Group (of LSB fame) has a similar focus to be a
"trailing edge" standard that reflects the reality of the world and not
drive the world to a certain place. LPI too needs to be a "trailing
edge" standard in that we reflect the skills employers need in a new
hire or promotion of existing employees.  Even here we need to be
careful because employers might desire the latest "oooooo, shiny"
technology which in reality turns out to not live up to the hype.

> - Evan

Thanks for caring!
Mark Miller
Program Manager
Exam Development Level 1
Linux Professional Institute

More information about the lpi-discuss mailing list