3 ms·
i think perhaps there is a misconception: the idea for a sufficiently vague answer is to see how deep the person can go. a non-answer isn't such a big deal (if
by spydum 11y ago
i think perhaps there is a misconception: the idea for a sufficiently vague answer is to see how deep the person can go. a non-answer isn't such a big deal (if someone doesnt know, better for them to say it than to make up some nonsense). also depends on the role. if i were interviewing for a network engineer, you better believe i expect the person to talk about IP/BGP/routing tables, and ideally be able to talk transport protocols and further. if they have no idea, and just know how to "conf t" or click in a GUI, thats pretty informative.
- akerl_ 11y agoWhich is why, thankfully, it's possible for the interviewer to have a dialogue. You don't have to lead in with "How does the internet work" to get that level of depth, and in fact it's not usually the best way to find if a candidate can deep dive. You can lead in by asking the candidate how something higher-level works, and then as they provide feedback, take the conversation towards lower-level network protocols and layers. That way, the person answering doesn't need to guess either your desired starting depth or direction, and they can focus on communicating their knowledge to you. Interviews tend to be far more productive when everybody involved is working to help the candidate provide as much of their knowledge as possible, without setting up confusing questions or overly hostile hurdles to "challenge" them.