[124354] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Finding content in your job title
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anton Kapela)
Tue Mar 30 23:58:54 2010
From: Anton Kapela <tkapela@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <q2x202705b1003302034wf5dad087ue49e345c437b4442@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 23:50:33 -0400
To: Jorge Amodio <jmamodio@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org >> nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 30, 2010, at 11:34 PM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
> "The title, Engineer, and its derivatives should be reserved for those
> individuals whose education and experience qualify them to practice in
> a manner that protects public safety. Strict use of the title serves
...fortunately for us (and CCIE's around the globe) running the Internet =
doesn't involve much public trust. Does it?
In a few states in the US, working for the same engineering firm for =
some number of years (usually 6 or more) counts similarly as passing a =
state-administered professional engineering exam. It would be with some =
significant precedent, then, that a job or other professional experience =
does indeed equate to state-sponsored public trust.
So, back to Steve's first question:
> How does the ops community feel about using this designation?=20
If you've been doing it for a while, and not been chased out, I would =
argue there is ample precedent to support don'ing the title. I guess the =
sticky-bits here include, potentially, a derth of colleges and graduate =
study calling itself "network engineering."
Failing that, perhaps nanog-l could take a vote:
Does Steve deserve the title of Network Train Driver, list?
-Tk=
