[154504] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: job screening question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Oliver Garraux)
Thu Jul 5 13:12:49 2012
In-Reply-To: <CAP-guGXoKDfpC_pwaQVxwjMoG29_bmJEM0Bs3KGwjXX-K0_BoA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 13:11:38 -0400
From: Oliver Garraux <oliver@g.garraux.net>
To: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Seems fairly straightforward to me. It'll break path MTU discovery.
I would hope someone applying for an "IP expert" position would know that.
Could HR be mangling the question or something?
Oliver
-------------------------------------
Oliver Garraux
Check out my blog: www.GetSimpliciti.com/blog
Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/olivergarraux
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:02 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I gave my HR folks a screening question to ask candidates for an IP
> expert position. I've gotten some "unexpected" answers, so I want to
> do a sanity check and make sure I'm not asking something unreasonable.
> And by "unexpected" I don't mean naively incorrect answers, I mean
> oh-my-God-how-did-you-get-that-cisco-certification answers.
>
> The question was:
>
> You implement a firewall on which you block all ICMP packets. What
> part of the TCP protocol (not IP in general, TCP specifically)
> malfunctions as a result?
>
>
> My questions for you are:
>
> 1. As an expert who follows NANOG, do you know the answer? Or is this
> question too hard?
>
> 2. Is the question too vague? Is there a clearer way to word it?
>
> 3. Is there a better screening question I could pass to HR to ask and
> check the candidate's response against the supplied answer?
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Herrin
>
>
> --
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>
