I received messages from people running both Solaris' built-in (or unbundled) DHCP server as well as ISC's DHCP server on Solaris 2.5.1+. This summary is largely incomplete, as the responses given did _not_ show Sun's included Solaris DHCP Server has anything to offer over ISC's DHCP Server. Some people "guessed" that there might be some ONC+/NIS+ failover options, but no one confirmed this. However, I still received a lot of good information. - AVOID: Solaris version 2.6 (and earlier unbundled) DHCP servers Several people confirmed that pre-Solaris version 2.7 DHCP servers were buggy. - RECOMMEND: Solaris version 2.8 10/01 (and later) DHCP servers Several people confirmed that Solaris 2.8 10/01 and later are working flawlessly for them. Installing all post-10/01 DHCP patches is also recommended. Most are impressed with the GUI administration tools in these late DHCP server releases which seem to make administration easier than ISC's DHCP server "single, flat config file" setup. - SCNA Note: Study up on the Solaris DHCP server, it's 10% of the exam As I mentioned before, if you plan on taking the Sun Certified Network Administrator (SCNA) exam, be sure you know the bundled Solaris DHCP _server_ in and out. It's _nothing_ like the ISC server, and most of the books (including Sun's SCNA Study Guide), and even the on-line Sun Docs, are _dead_wrong_ in many areas. Learn it from a working system (which we should all be doing anyway, right? ;-). -- Bryan P.S. I feel I must add this, so my apologize in advance: In responses, several people accused me of "cheating" on the SCNA by using some of the available "training/study guides." I think people forget that "computer-administered" examinations are _not_ about what you know (let alone any extensive SunOS/Solaris experience -- I have 10 years, 6 _very_heavy_!), but if you can pass the objectives on the examination which are usually _not_ "real-world" situations. Most "computer-administered" examinations try to be "hard" by either A) making you memorize things that you usually hit the man pages for (this is the Sun approach) or B) being very ambiguous in an attempt to confuse the test taker (this is the Microsoft approach). I agree that _neither_ is a good test for experienced administrators -- hence the "paper certification" moniker (which I _do_ believe is an adequate description). Yes, it is possible that an experienced admin will pass them "straight up," but if you want to get 90%+ (like I do), you use the books to "brush up" on areas where you are weak. Only "performance-based" laboratory/peer-reviewed examinations -- like select Cisco certifications (and those modeled after them -- e.g., RedHat RHCE) test for "real world" experience where study guides are useless (e.g., the RHCE passing rate went down drastically after Syngress released its RHCE Study Guide). While I would love to see _all_ certifications follow the "performance-based" path (possibly with background/experience checks like the CISSP), many HR departments are using "paper certifications" right now to "filter out" candidates. Hence why I started sucking up certifications last month, because I'm currently unemployed and I cannot find self-employment without these little bits of paper that prospective clients want. So cut me some slack on the certs please, I'm even a degreed engineer (and _hate_ the vendor "engineer" crap too ;-). -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org (407)489-7013 CompTIA A+ i-Net+ Linux+ Network+ Server+ Sun SCSA SCNA ---------------------------------------------------------------- SmithConcepts, Inc. -- http://www.SmithConcepts.com Consulting Engineers and IT Professionals _______________________________________________ sunmanagers mailing list sunmanagers@sunmanagers.org http://www.sunmanagers.org/mailman/listinfo/sunmanagersReceived on Sat Jul 20 18:28:32 2002
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Mar 03 2016 - 06:42:49 EST