[150417] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: common time-management mistake: rack & stack
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (isabel dias)
Thu Feb 23 15:02:28 2012
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:00:59 -0800 (PST)
From: isabel dias <isabeldias1@yahoo.com>
To: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>, Dan Golding <dgolding@ragingwire.com>
In-Reply-To: <20120223193539.GA19426@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: isabel dias <isabeldias1@yahoo.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
1- what do you mean by "Licensed folks working in architecture and design"?=
=0A=A0=0A2- You wrote "IT isn't governed by the same hard (physical) rules =
as=0Atraditional engineering, but you also can't be freely creative and=0Ae=
xpect to come up with something that works." bolox!=0AAs far as I'm aware y=
ou are not showing any creative work that requires the copywrite/authoring =
work. Unfortunatly the great majority of us are "users" of the system.=A0Th=
ere are different levels of users, some more cleaver than others.=0A=A0=0AT=
he one that looks for data sets in databases in in IT and so is into "scrip=
ting" and CShell.=0A=A0=0AThe sponsor is the issue.He was tasked to do so!=
=A0have you ever been employed or have been offered employment by someone t=
hat has a lower weight than you have?=0Athe frameworks seem to be known mor=
e and more and still................some face unemployment whereas others a=
re and will always be your sponsors- think about the director of your local=
post office=A0 :-)=0A=A0=0AHave you ever thought the reason why you are do=
ing what you are doing instead of signing a PO?=0A=A0=0AWho's business is t=
his ? do you know why you are required to have at least three A levels? and=
at least two MSc/MA? Or even maybe a PhD? Where exactly are you based?=0A=
=A0=0A=A0=0A=A0=0A=A0=0A=A0=0A=A0=0A=A0=0A=A0=0A=A0=0A=0A=0A_______________=
_________________=0AFrom: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>=0ATo: Dan Golding=
<dgolding@ragingwire.com> =0ACc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> =0ASent: Thursday=
, February 23, 2012 7:35 PM=0ASubject: Re: common time-management mistake: =
rack & stack=0A=0AIn a message written on Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:37:57PM -=
0800, Dan Golding wrote:=0A> I disagree. The best model is - gasp - enginee=
ring, a profession which=0A> many in "networking" claim to be a part of, bu=
t few actually are. In the=0A> engineering world (not CS, not development -=
think ME and EE), there is=0A> a strongly defined relationship between jun=
ior and senior engineers, and=0A> real mentorship. The problem with "networ=
king" is that TOO MANY skills=0A=0AActually, the differences are deeper tha=
n you suggest, and it's why=0Athe model you suggest won't work for networki=
ng, yet.=A0 I think=0Athere's a chance they may in the future, although it'=
s not a given.=0A=0AThere are several aspects to licensing, but one of the =
most important=0Ais that the applicant knows basic rules of the profession.=
=A0 In most=0Acases these rules are codified into law, and can be tested in=
a=0Astraitforwad way.=A0 An EE doesn't go around saying "run your circits=
=0Aat 80% unless you have a 100% duty breaker" because it's a good=0Aidea, =
or they like it, or their vendor told them do.=A0 They do that=0Abecause it=
's part of the National Electric Code which everyone=0A(including non-licen=
sed folks) is _required by law_ to follow.=0A=0ANetworking does not have "c=
odes".=A0 There's nothing to test against.=0AIf we wanted to apply a licens=
ed engineer model to the networking=0Afield the first thing that would need=
to be developed is a set of=0Acomprehensive codes.=A0 Anyone who's experie=
nced PCI (as an example=0Aof an IT attempt at something similar to a code) =
and also worked=0Awith a more established one (NEC, NFPA, etc) knows that I=
T isn't=0Aeven in the same ballpark yet.=A0 I won't go into the reasons her=
e,=0AI think there are many and we could discuss that for hours.=0A=0ABut I=
actually think your analogy is more misplaced because the=0Anames do not l=
ine up.=A0 The networking equivilant of an EE or ME is=0Athe "Network Archi=
tect".=A0 EE's and ME's are designers in their=0Aprofessions.=A0 They write=
up blueprints and plans.=A0 This is also=0Awhat network architects do.=A0 =
Think a CCDA operating as a sales=0Aengineer.=A0 They draw up a design but =
never implement it.=0A=0ANetwork Engineers are the trades people.=A0 We com=
e up with really=0Adumb names like Network Enginneer 1, 2, 3 and 4.=A0 In a=
real trade=0Athese would be apprentice, journyman, master, supervisor.=A0 =
They=0Atake the plans and turn it into something.=A0 In a real trade=0A(ele=
ctrican, plumber, hvac, etc) the supervisor interacts with the=0Aapprentice=
, journeyman and master, who are all working on the same=0Ateam.=A0 The sub=
tasks are divided according to skill.=0A=0AIn IT, the Network Engineer 4 th=
inks he only needs to talk to the=0ANetwork Engineer 3.=A0 Everyone else is=
"below him".=A0 How many companies=0Ahave Network Engineer 1's that aren't=
allowed to even log into many=0Aof their network devices, or call the engi=
neer level 3's and 4's=0Aon the phone?=A0 This is absurd.=A0 Some companies=
even put them in=0Adifferent call centers sioled away from each other so t=
hey don't=0Aeven know who call!=A0 This is where I think we need more mento=
rship=0Aand teamwork.=A0 When a team of electricans shows up the apprentice=
=0Adoes a lot of the meanial work, but is also allowed to do some of=0Athe =
higher level work, under strict supervision.=0A=0AI think, in a sense, we a=
gree more than disagree.=A0 There are established=0Amodels for engineering =
disciplins and IT would probably do better in=0Amany ways if it were to fal=
l in line.=A0 Licensed folks working in=0Aarchitecture and design.=A0 Codes=
to standardize and provide quality=0Acontrol and safety.=A0 Apprenticed sk=
illed trades to implement.=A0 What=0Awe're arguing over here is some minor =
semantics of how that structure=0Aworks in IT.=0A=0AHOWEVER, I am not sure =
it completely works.=A0 Here's why; some=0Acolleges have C.S. in the Arts a=
nd Sciences college, and treat how=0Ato program more like how to write a no=
vel than how to build a bridge.=0AOthers have it in the Engineering college=
, and treat it more like=0Abuilding a bridge than writing an novel.=A0 What=
seems to work is a=0Ablend in the real world, treating most IT tasks like =
classical=0Aengineering doesn't work out well, nor does treating it like wr=
iting=0Aa book.=A0 IT isn't governed by the same hard (physical) rules as=
=0Atraditional engineering, but you also can't be freely creative and=0Aexp=
ect to come up with something that works.=0A=0AI personally would like to s=
ee the industry work on the "code"=0Aproblem, which would be necessary pre-=
work for licensing.=A0 I'd also=0Alike to see trade style mentoring.=A0 I t=
hink those can proceed in=0Aparallel.=A0 I'm just personally prepared for t=
he eventuality that=0AIT might never fit into as ridgid a framework as EE o=
r ME.=0A=0A-- =0A=A0 =A0 =A0 Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440=0A=
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
