Unix or Linux or CCNA?

24

Comments

  • dynamikdynamik Banned Posts: 12,312 ■■■■■■■■■□
    If you want to learn, pick whatever distro you want (they're far more similar than they aredifferent; it really doesn't matter when you're starting out), but don't do a GUI install. Being stuck at the command-line is whole different world. It'll force you to learn, but you'll love it once you get it down.

    If you just want a functional desktop OS, Ubuntu is the way to go. Fedora's alright too.
  • phantasmphantasm Member Posts: 995
    loxleynew wrote: »
    So basically it helps teach you the commands for *NIX that Ubuntu wouldn't because Ubuntu is more "user friendly"? On a side note this may sound dumb but why memorize hundreds of commands when you can just look them up later? I know some of them would come in handy and are necessary to remember but just like dos many of those commands are pointless remembering besides when you need them?

    I guess ^^ is my lack of understanding but just curious before I dive into the world of *NIX and further away from GUI interfaces.

    The commands you learn are not useless and you will use most daily when using Linux. Providing of course that you don't spend all your time in Linux in the GUI. If you plan to use the GUI only then stick with Windows.

    Other things like formatting and creating file systems will be taught to you as well as system file configuration and where the files are stored. You learn a lot during a Gentoo install, but no one I've recommended it to have done it. Instead they call me all the time when they're looking for a configuration file. Of which I don't answer them anymore.

    A little pain now or a lot of pain later. Gentoo is versatile as can be and will allow you to tweak the system in ways that no other distro lets you. Think USE flags. But again, you don't know what those are unless you've installed and used Gentoo.
    "No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man." -Heraclitus
  • phoeneousphoeneous Go ping yourself... Member Posts: 2,333 ■■■■■■■□□□
    Ubuntu hands down.

    I meant Unix, not Linux.
  • NightShade03NightShade03 Member Posts: 1,383 ■■■■■■■□□□
    phoeneous wrote: »
    I meant Unix, not Linux.

    Free BSD or OpenSolaris
  • dynamikdynamik Banned Posts: 12,312 ■■■■■■■■■□
  • SephStormSephStorm Member Posts: 1,732
    phantasm wrote: »
    The commands you learn are not useless and you will use most daily when using Linux. Providing of course that you don't spend all your time in Linux in the GUI. If you plan to use the GUI only then stick with Windows.

    Other things like formatting and creating file systems will be taught to you as well as system file configuration and where the files are stored. You learn a lot during a Gentoo install, but no one I've recommended it to have done it. Instead they call me all the time when they're looking for a configuration file. Of which I don't answer them anymore.

    A little pain now or a lot of pain later. Gentoo is versatile as can be and will allow you to tweak the system in ways that no other distro lets you. Think USE flags. But again, you don't know what those are unless you've installed and used Gentoo.

    Interesting, but I think that is percisly why a new linux user shouldn't start out with something like a gentoo install, the amount of options could be overwhelming. I of course, say this without reviewing the documentation. I'll probably download it tonight and work through it, but I have my reservations, and doubts.

    Also, that last remark worries me, "Think USE flags. But again, you don't know what those are unless you've installed and used Gentoo."

    If a person is trying to learn Linux in general, they don't need to be distracted with distro specific commands and whatnot. Especially during the install process. Next thing you know hes trying to use a gentoo command on a centos install. Unlikely there will be any negative side effects, but now he was to run around troubleshooting when his six our install doesn't work.
  • phantasmphantasm Member Posts: 995
    SephStorm wrote: »
    Interesting, but I think that is percisly why a new linux user shouldn't start out with something like a gentoo install, the amount of options could be overwhelming. I of course, say this without reviewing the documentation. I'll probably download it tonight and work through it, but I have my reservations, and doubts.

    Also, that last remark worries me, "Think USE flags. But again, you don't know what those are unless you've installed and used Gentoo."

    If a person is trying to learn Linux in general, they don't need to be distracted with distro specific commands and whatnot. Especially during the install process. Next thing you know hes trying to use a gentoo command on a centos install. Unlikely there will be any negative side effects, but now he was to run around troubleshooting when his six our install doesn't work.

    USE flags in Gentoo are specified in the make.conf file which is checked for architecture information and specific system information each time a package is emerged. The USE flags are also explained in the handbook and they also give you a base line to use. Also, the profile you select during the install has a baseline set of USE flags already selected.

    The USE flags allow for a more granular control over the OS. For example, if you don't want IPv6 support then you would do 2 things. The first being to not include it in the kernel and the second would be to specify -ipv6 as a USE flag. Then whenever a program is emerged that has IPv6 the OS will not compile that support into the software package. The USE flags are amazingly powerful and very beneficial after you've gotten used to them.
    "No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man." -Heraclitus
  • SephStormSephStorm Member Posts: 1,732
    Again, wouldn't you say that is unnecessary for someone starting out with linux?
  • Bl8ckr0uterBl8ckr0uter Inactive Imported Users Posts: 5,031 ■■■■■■■■□□
    SephStorm wrote: »
    Again, wouldn't you say that is unnecessary for someone starting out with linux?

    Maybe for someone who just wants basic knowledge. For someone who wants deep, admin level knowledge and beyond it might be worthwhile. I for one, am going to do this at some point.
  • networker050184networker050184 Mod Posts: 11,962 Mod
    SephStorm wrote: »
    Again, wouldn't you say that is unnecessary for someone starting out with linux?

    I'd have to agree. When I'm learning something I start with a high level overview and then dig into the details as I get a solid conceptual understanding.

    That would be equivalent to learning all the intricacies of OSPF with out a solid understanding of routing in general first IMO.
    An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made.
  • Bl8ckr0uterBl8ckr0uter Inactive Imported Users Posts: 5,031 ■■■■■■■■□□
    I'd have to agree. When I'm learning something I start with a high level overview and then dig into the details as I get a solid conceptual understanding.

    That would be equivalent to learning all the intricacies of OSPF with out a solid understanding of routing in general first IMO.


    It probably isn't something you should do day one but after you have learned the very basics why not? Many people read CCNP level books while studying for the CCNA. This is kind of the same thing IMO.
  • SephStormSephStorm Member Posts: 1,732
    I'd have to agree. When I'm learning something I start with a high level overview and then dig into the details as I get a solid conceptual understanding.

    That would be equivalent to learning all the intricacies of OSPF with out a solid understanding of routing in general first IMO.

    *nods*

    And thats all i'm saying. I personally feel I need to re-learn linux, just the basics, then go on from there.
  • phantasmphantasm Member Posts: 995
    SephStorm wrote: »
    *nods*

    And thats all i'm saying. I personally feel I need to re-learn linux, just the basics, then go on from there.

    That's fine. I just made my recommendation, but like I said, it's not for everyone. Whatever distro you choose, enjoy it! Linux is a great road to travel down.
    "No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man." -Heraclitus
  • networker050184networker050184 Mod Posts: 11,962 Mod
    knwminus wrote: »
    It probably isn't something you should do day one but after you have learned the very basics why not?.


    That is what I'm saying. I didn't say to never learn the details, just they aren't needed from day one to get a good understanding.
    An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made.
  • loxleynewloxleynew Member Posts: 405
    Hmm you lost me with all that USE flag stuff. I think i'm going to install a gui version of ubuntu and work my way down like you said using more and more command options to do stuff. Then after a few days maybe move onto fedora or do that gentoo install once I "get the over-all picture" of the file structure and stuff in a more "noob" friendly setting haha.
  • GAngelGAngel Member Posts: 708
    fedora 6 or 7. The goold old days when everything only worked 50% of the time. You'll either bash your head in or get very good whichever comes first.
  • sidsanderssidsanders Member Posts: 217 ■■■□□□□□□□
    loxleynew wrote: »
    Mainly support developers. Side note I hate programming beside the occasional VB or batch scripting which hardly counts lol.

    may be worth it to compile some items from source vs apt-get/rpm (yum)/etc binary install packages. that may be down the line however it will give you some insight into getting things compiled/linked that dev folks **may** ask your help on in that type of env.

    a good example of this is openldap -- many distros ship ver 2.3 which is years out of date...

    no hurry on that type of work though...
    GO TEAM VENTURE!!!!
  • it_consultantit_consultant Member Posts: 1,903
    I'd have to agree. When I'm learning something I start with a high level overview and then dig into the details as I get a solid conceptual understanding.

    That would be equivalent to learning all the intricacies of OSPF with out a solid understanding of routing in general first IMO.

    Learning the intricacies of OSPF IS learning general routing.

    Its better to start learning at the detail level if you want to become a professional on that technology. Its what separates you from a user. It always surprises me when people lean towards the easy route, your not doing yourself any favors. When it comes time to start managing a Red Hat Server (the most common linux flavor in business) what you learn doing a GUI install of Ubuntu is not helpful.

    Learn how to install a program from a tarball. You MUST learn vi, as much of a pain as that thing is there is no way of getting around it. Learn cron scripting. Learn how to manage Apache and sendmail. Learn how to manage mySQL. Learn how to integrate linux into Windows domains. Learn how to manage Amanda backups.
  • networker050184networker050184 Mod Posts: 11,962 Mod
    Learning the intricacies of OSPF IS learning general routing.

    No thats learning one single routing protocol.
    An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made.
  • phoeneousphoeneous Go ping yourself... Member Posts: 2,333 ■■■■■■■□□□
    Learning the intricacies of OSPF IS learning general routing.

    How many CCNA's do you know that know the intricacies of ospf?
  • phantasmphantasm Member Posts: 995
    phoeneous wrote: »
    How many CCNA's do you know that know the intricacies of ospf?

    I know a CCNA who didn't know what telnet was. icon_rolleyes.gif
    "No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man." -Heraclitus
  • NightShade03NightShade03 Member Posts: 1,383 ■■■■■■■□□□
    phantasm wrote: »
    I know a CCNA who didn't know what telnet was. icon_rolleyes.gif

    Hire that guy icon_thumright.gif lol
  • tierstentiersten Member Posts: 4,505
    phantasm wrote: »
    I know a CCNA who didn't know what telnet was. icon_rolleyes.gif
    Pfft. Use SSH or the console! ;)
  • it_consultantit_consultant Member Posts: 1,903
    No thats learning one single routing protocol.

    Routing protocols and routing kinda go hand in hand. The concept of routing is not terribly difficult, there is no expert in routing who does not know at least one routing protocol to a high degree of competency. There is a reason why right after learning what a layer three route you start learning about routing protocols.

    This is beside the point. If you want to work in network routing you must know OSPF. Sort of like if you want to be Linux Server admin you have to work with the common linux servers. Which is not Ubuntu. Ubuntu is great because it is easy and highly portable but it does not give you relevant experience to being a Linux admin.

    OSPF is not focused on in CCNA, but it should be. I have never used EIGRP in an enterprise setting. In the real world we deal with ISPs that use Juniper routers, customers that have watchguard firewalls, etc.

    BGP should be brought up as well.
  • phantasmphantasm Member Posts: 995
    OSPF is not focused on in CCNA, but it should be. I have never used EIGRP in an enterprise setting. In the real world we deal with ISPs that use Juniper routers, customers that have watchguard firewalls, etc.

    BGP should be brought up as well.

    I'm reading CCNP:ROUTE right now and honestly, the depth that book goes into for OSPF and the BGP coverage is good for the CCNP. That level of detail is not needed in the CCNA. Not only is it not needed, but it would be overkill for most people. For example, I know a lot of people have issues with subnetting and route summarization. Try getting them to focus on mutli-area OSPF as well as BGP. Not a good idea.

    Also, I have worked with EIGRP in an enterprise environment. On the ISP side, which I've also worked we deal with OSPF and BGP more than not. The CCNA is an introduction certification. The CCNP is more in depth and is right where it should be in my opinion.
    "No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man." -Heraclitus
  • networker050184networker050184 Mod Posts: 11,962 Mod
    phantasm wrote: »
    I'm reading CCNP:ROUTE right now and honestly, the depth that book goes into for OSPF and the BGP coverage is good for the CCNP. That level of detail is not needed in the CCNA. Not only is it not needed, but it would be overkill for most people. For example, I know a lot of people have issues with subnetting and route summarization. Try getting them to focus on mutli-area OSPF as well as BGP. Not a good idea.

    Also, I have worked with EIGRP in an enterprise environment. On the ISP side, which I've also worked we deal with OSPF and BGP more than not. The CCNA is an introduction certification. The CCNP is more in depth and is right where it should be in my opinion.


    Agreed 100%

    The details of OSPF are not needed for basic routing knowledge. First you need to learn IP forwarding, then distance vector and link state theories and then you can get to just the basics of specific protocols.

    That is not saying never learn it, but if you dumped sham links on someone who barely knew the basics of routing it would be over their head. Could they understand it? Sure, but thats kind of like reading a book starting with the last chapter. You can get it down eventually but wouldn't it have been so much easier to start on the first chapter?

    Just because your real world doesn't include EIGRP that doesn't mean its not used out there. We use EIGRP on the corporate side and OSPF on the ISP side.
    An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made.
  • it_consultantit_consultant Member Posts: 1,903
    I have nothing against EIGRP but for the fact that its not compatible with other routers. This does become an issue. Some Cisco routers don't even have EIGRP built in anymore.

    The point I was trying to make was not that CCNA is the be all of routing; but that if you want to become a routing expert, then it is necessary to spend some time on OSPF and BGP since those protocols are in wide use. You can cover the foundations of routing including the things you mention very quickly; I mean within a couple of hours or less. Maybe I just like to jump in and get my hands dirty (in a lab of course) more than other people. Perhaps knowing NSSA vs TSA is advanced; but I have heard a lot of complaints from network engineers that point out the weakness in OSPF knowledge within the junior network engineer ranks. So I recommend what I have learned from experience, you should learn more than you think you will need.


    Full Disclosure: I have my CCNA but I prefer Juniper routers and HP switches.
  • networker050184networker050184 Mod Posts: 11,962 Mod
    No one was talking about how to be a routing expert, routing was just an example.

    What we are talking about is how to learn something from the ground up. IMO the best way to learn is to start with the basics and work your way up. Regardless of the technology you are learning.
    An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made.
  • filkenjitsufilkenjitsu CCNA R&S, CCNA SP Member Posts: 564 ■■■■□□□□□□
    In all my experience, Solaris is used the most in service provider networks. Lucent 5E, Nortel DMS, etc. All use Solaris as their base operating system.

    All the systems at my job nationwide use Solaris which is why I use OpenSolaris for learning at home.

    Solaris is the best Unix to learn if you want to make money from the skillset.
    CISSP, CCNA SP
    Bachelors of Science in Telecommunications - Mt. Sierra College
    Masters of Networking and Communications Management, Focus in Wireless - Keller
  • AhriakinAhriakin SupremeNetworkOverlord Member Posts: 1,799 ■■■■■■■■□□
    knwminus wrote: »
    Survey says "Read the thread" and you may find you answer.

    When you see that kind of thread (no real link to the topic, 0 post user etc.) there's a good chance it's just a spam bot (usually trying to drop a link through their signature). Best to just report and ignore as it will likely (and this case was before I read the report email, thanks btw) be thrashed.
    We responded to the Year 2000 issue with "Y2K" solutions...isn't this the kind of thinking that got us into trouble in the first place?
Sign In or Register to comment.