Maybe not an appropriate topic for Nanog... but... it is becoming a sad fact
that the clue level of 'internet engineers' is going down.
Christian
Perhaps if we can get the "higher-ups" to stop hiring noc newbies based on
certs and begin hiring based on raw intelligence...then maybe we can get
the overall clue factor back to a reasonable level.
Perhaps if we can get the "higher-ups" to stop hiring noc newbies based on
certs and begin hiring based on raw intelligence...then maybe we can get
the overall clue factor back to a reasonable level.
That's true I think. Most of the people I ask questions of posess neither
a CCIE nor a comp-sci degree. Some do, but not enough to convince me that
real-world experience and contact with knowledgeable people isn't a valid
"education". How many folks here that consider themselves a "leader" in
net ops at their place of employ were formally educated?
Charles
In my opinion, EVERY junior engineer should spend some time in the NOC under
the guidance of more Senior Engineers before moving on in the organization.
And those Senior Engineers should have a program in which these junior
engineers must go through before allowing them to interface with other ISP's
to troubleshoot problems. If you know the tools that they need, then put
them in a position to succeed. And remember most of all, that it's not
beneath you to nurture and mentor people.
In my opinion, EVERY junior engineer should spend some time in the NOC under
the guidance of more Senior Engineers before moving on in the organization.
I think today most are a little too liberal with the term engineer. Those
of us who went the traditional route of education and earned the title as
an ME, EE or CE sometimes bristle that we're lumped in with the guy who
just passed his CNE from the books.
In ten years with my degree, I always reflect on what the dean of the
College of Engineering said in his closing statements before we graduated:
"The purpose of Engineering School is not to memorize formulas, tables and
charts. The purpose of Engineering School is to teach you how to think."
And that we did. I have a BSEE. I don't do any circuit design or power
system design. However, every day I use the same skills I learned then.
Break it down into manageable pieces. Solve each piece. If it isn't
manageable or solvable, loop until you get it into managable chunks.
Some would argue we should be a little more judicious in the application of
the term Engineer, especially for the 18-22 y/o folks hired off the street
with no prior NOC and/or network experience. Actually, in some states, its
a legal title.
In the Professional Engineer certification system, one doesn't even sit for
the exam until one has spent at least five years as an EIT, or
Engineer-in-training, an 8 hour comprehensive exam where EVERYTHING you
could possibly have remotely looked at in your education is fair game. As
an EE, I had loads of fun remembering Statics and Dynamics from four years
earlier, or Thermodynamics from Freshman Physics.
Maybe its time we had something like that in the network world, more than
the 6 tests and you're in club that is the CNE/MCSE program ...
Maybe then "engineers" would heed the warnings of their software vendors
about loading code on their frame switches.
I agree. The term 'Engineer' is used much to liberally.
After 4 years of Communications in the Army, I was 24 years old as a
Freshman in College. I knew how to think and analyze, but I needed to add
structure to my ability. To have a process for troubleshooting, it didn't
matter if I was working on router problems or a diagramming football plays,
I wanted to do research and develop concise analysis skills and then be able
to convey my findings to someone else. And this what engineering school did
for me.
I think a big part of being an Engineer is being a subject matter expert as
well. Wouldn't you agree? But if you don't know how to explain what you've
learned to someone else, then you're the only one it can benefit. What good
is that?
I have worked with intelligent people over the years, but ask them to
explain something or whiteboard it for you. LOOK OUT!
I don't know about any one else, but when I can explain something to someone
and help them to understand it, then I get a kick out of that. And if alot
of other 'Engineers' would do the same thing then we wouldn't have as many
'Figure-head' Engineers.
ekgermann@cctec.com (Eric Germann) writes:
I think today most are a little too liberal with the term engineer. Those
of us who went the traditional route of education and earned the title as
an ME, EE or CE sometimes bristle that we're lumped in with the guy who
just passed his CNE from the books.
hmmm. then, how do you feel about being lumped in with highschool dropouts
who have no certification whatsoever?
I am a highschool dropout (I did at least take the GED) and have no
certification, so far it has not bee a problem. When I look for people, I
want someone that is dedicated, has the ability to learn, and can work
without being managed all the time. I have hired many people with
specialized tech degrees that were just worthless. I am not saying
everybody with a degree is stupid, but having one does not help you that
much in my book.
Back to my original complaint.... The people that I have issue with are
not the highschool dropouts. These are people in the NOC supposedly
versed in routing protocols. I know the requirements for 2nd level
engineers and they invariably include a CE or an EE degree and several
years real experience. Why then would a technician call me back in
regards to a ticket I opened through a BGP_specific maildrop and not know
what BGP was? The only reason I can fathom is disorganization. There
are some NSP's out there that are similar if not very similar to the
"highschool engineer". There should be more policy behind their practice.
Michael Heller
Sr. Systems Engineer
Earthweb, Inc.
212.448.4175
mikeh@earthweb.com
hmmm. then, how do you feel about being lumped in with highschool dropouts
who have no certification whatsoever?
--
Paul Vixie <vixie@mibh.net>
Ohhh, just - terrible -! :\
Next thing you know , you'll tell us people wear shorts to
the Thomas J Watson Research center.... not just light shirts, and
dark ties.
:)
Richard
Because of politics and who you know and not
what you know, and because of age discrimination
removing all the people that did know because
they became to expensive, so degree bias is the
rule of thumb backed by the other two.
Henry
Mike Heller wrote:
There is one problem for the TELCOM and ISP here. You can't hire an
high-quality engeneer as the phone-support staff; on the other hand, you
sometimes need such engeneer to answer a very complex question from the
customer.
If you know how to provide CCIE ingeneer with such offer - welcome, I do
not know. The only solution I know is to have some development or design
branch and to have some kind of _support duty_ (once a week, for example)
for the people from this branch. If you offer an support work for the
CCIE engeneer (for example) - I do not think you could pick up any for
the any salary (may be I am wrong but it's often when the salary is not
the only think the people are thinking about)...
And this (IP) service is new for the TELCO, and they have a very high
hierarchy structure - and this prevent their customer from any contacts
from their high-skilled engeneers. The bigger is your ISP, the less
chance you have to get high-skilled support for your troubles (except if
you are the Bill Gates yourself and they treat you as a VIP customer).
Here's a perfect example of the "Piece of paper means nothing" scenario:
I was on a system deployment today for a national funeral home chain.
After working with their tech support guy to get the router configured the
way they wanted it, he told me I needed a crossover cable to connect it to
the hub. I disagreed and suggested we at least try to use the normal RJ-45
I had in my hand. That got me kicked up one level to another tech who told
me that the previous tech "had a college degree and is our expert, so go
get a crossover cable". Again, I balked and wanted to at least try to
connect using the cable in my hands. That got me bumped up again several
times, eventually coming to the Vice President in charge of the deployment
who told me "we've got certified experts who say you need that cable so go
get it!".
(Anyone see this coming?). I got the cable - and of course it didn't work.
The normal cable did (DUH!).
So I had 3 "certified" "experts" and a "college degree" who told me that I
needed something that I didn't - and refused to even *try* it my way; and
were wrong.
"NSI and ICANN - on the next Springer!"
Dean Robb
Owner, PC-EASY
(757) 495-EASY [3279]
On-site computer repairs, upgrades and consultations
Senior Reviewer, WWW.TheGamers.Net - an IEN affiliate.
College degree in what, Asian studies?
Even a CS degree won't help you with cables.
Every engineer should know when to rely on the technician.
I learned that a long time ago in the electronics business.
As for your situation, you stood there and just insisted instead of
going through the pinouts with those who disagree. Escalation of
the conflict is poor interpersonal relations. Patient explanation
to show them why you are right would hae taken less of your time
than all the pushing and left you with happier customers and colleagues.
Why'd you have to ask the tech in the first place whether to use a straight
thru or crossover? Not like you're gonna smoke the hub using the one in
your hand if you'd try it ...
Somethings wrong on both ends if putting a 10BaseT cable between a hub and
router requires a VP's signoff.
Eric