This is one of those interview questions that is so disconnected from the day-to-day work of systems administrators and DevOps types, yet it's probably the second-most popular question to ask (behind to "Do you have any questions for me?"). It's not a dumb question, per se, it's just that 90% of the details of the answer is stuff that most of us will never have to mess with.
Still, it's asked so frequently that it's worth learning. While you're at it, take the time to learn dig(1), inside and out. This is something that you'll use frequently and having a solid understanding of dig will make the DNS question a breeze, especially if you are quizzed on aspects of the resolution process.
Bonus points when answering this question: mention the existence of NIS as a resolution option when discussing nsswitch.conf. :)
All of that said, I never ask this question. I'd rather test a candidate's knowledge by asking them about things that we do have to do frequently, like holding a package with APT...backporting a package...writing IPtables rules...structure of Chef cookbooks, etc.
I disagree, I think this is a very high level description. Every sysadmin should know, and be able to explain in basic terms, the hierarchical nature of DNS. They should also know the difference between an authoritative and recursive DNS server, the basic record types, how zone transfers work, how to query servers, etc.
I would treat this as a bonus question, but not a required one to answer. If the interviewee is on the right track with a lot of good DNS questions and you throw this one at them, it might set them out from the pack.
A bit tangential, but I never liked that question. I mean, I understand the importance of giving the interviewee a chance to ask questions they may have about the company, but sometimes it feels like there's the expectation that one should have questions, and if you don't have any, it means you don't care, or aren't invested, or aren't a good candidate.
[In my experience, it usually means (A) someone else (perhaps one of the other interviewers) already answered it, or (B) it's hard to come up with questions on the spot.]
But maybe that's just a holdover from me having done interviewing workshops, etc. in high school/college which were tailored more for jobs in the financial sector, where this very much is the case.
Does anybody else feel this way? Or perhaps more importantly, if you conduct interviews (and ask this question), how do you react when a candidate doesn't have questions they want to ask?
From the interviewer side, I always ask this. I think it's just polite and don't really have any expectations at all. If somebody doesn't have questions, that's fine; if they want to know if there's a good coffee shop nearby, that's fine too.
But then, I'm not really one of those "culture fit" interviewers. By this point in the interview, I have a pretty good sense of where I think your technical skills are and that's what matters to me. I think judging people on weird intangibles is where interviewers tend to let their prejudices sway their judgment, and I strive to avoid that.
On the other side of the table, I always ask about bike facilities and source control processes.
For a job that you have done your research on, usually the question is pointless. Most high level jobs will be fairly clear about what they give back to you.
For many jobs where you might be just some guy, people might ask questions about the job site, culture, day to day minutiae, areas of specific responsibility, etc.
I really think it is a holdover from a time someone would go hat in hand to a job site and be given little information except "You are doing X, prove to me you should have this job."
I have interviewed a bunch of people for jobs that fit in both places in the spectrum, and while I don't expect the candidate to ask questions, if they are a face among the crowd of 20 interviews and give you relevant questions about your business it can show their interest in what you do, it can also show they are sensitive about specific things.
Comments
This is one of those interview questions that is so disconnected from the day-to-day work of systems administrators and DevOps types, yet it's probably the second-most popular question to ask (behind to "Do you have any questions for me?"). It's not a dumb question, per se, it's just that 90% of the details of the answer is stuff that most of us will never have to mess with.
Still, it's asked so frequently that it's worth learning. While you're at it, take the time to learn dig(1), inside and out. This is something that you'll use frequently and having a solid understanding of dig will make the DNS question a breeze, especially if you are quizzed on aspects of the resolution process.
Bonus points when answering this question: mention the existence of NIS as a resolution option when discussing nsswitch.conf. :)
All of that said, I never ask this question. I'd rather test a candidate's knowledge by asking them about things that we do have to do frequently, like holding a package with APT...backporting a package...writing IPtables rules...structure of Chef cookbooks, etc.
73's. :) NW5W
I disagree, I think this is a very high level description. Every sysadmin should know, and be able to explain in basic terms, the hierarchical nature of DNS. They should also know the difference between an authoritative and recursive DNS server, the basic record types, how zone transfers work, how to query servers, etc.
I would treat this as a bonus question, but not a required one to answer. If the interviewee is on the right track with a lot of good DNS questions and you throw this one at them, it might set them out from the pack.
A bit tangential, but I never liked that question. I mean, I understand the importance of giving the interviewee a chance to ask questions they may have about the company, but sometimes it feels like there's the expectation that one should have questions, and if you don't have any, it means you don't care, or aren't invested, or aren't a good candidate.
[In my experience, it usually means (A) someone else (perhaps one of the other interviewers) already answered it, or (B) it's hard to come up with questions on the spot.]
But maybe that's just a holdover from me having done interviewing workshops, etc. in high school/college which were tailored more for jobs in the financial sector, where this very much is the case.
Does anybody else feel this way? Or perhaps more importantly, if you conduct interviews (and ask this question), how do you react when a candidate doesn't have questions they want to ask?
From the interviewer side, I always ask this. I think it's just polite and don't really have any expectations at all. If somebody doesn't have questions, that's fine; if they want to know if there's a good coffee shop nearby, that's fine too.
But then, I'm not really one of those "culture fit" interviewers. By this point in the interview, I have a pretty good sense of where I think your technical skills are and that's what matters to me. I think judging people on weird intangibles is where interviewers tend to let their prejudices sway their judgment, and I strive to avoid that.
On the other side of the table, I always ask about bike facilities and source control processes.
For a job that you have done your research on, usually the question is pointless. Most high level jobs will be fairly clear about what they give back to you.
For many jobs where you might be just some guy, people might ask questions about the job site, culture, day to day minutiae, areas of specific responsibility, etc.
I really think it is a holdover from a time someone would go hat in hand to a job site and be given little information except "You are doing X, prove to me you should have this job."
I have interviewed a bunch of people for jobs that fit in both places in the spectrum, and while I don't expect the candidate to ask questions, if they are a face among the crowd of 20 interviews and give you relevant questions about your business it can show their interest in what you do, it can also show they are sensitive about specific things.