exclusive content published on December 7, 2006

When the Linux Professional Institute was formed, the mantra was "vendor neutral" Linux certifications that don't arbitrarily expire. I bought into the LPI, now it is biting me.

As an early supporter of LPI and one of the first people to earn the LPIC-2 certification (January 2002, LPI000003995), this is a bitter pill. The LPI certification used to mean more to me than other certifications, but now I find it will expire like last month's eggnog. The lack of forced obsolescence was precisely why I focused on the LPI instead of other Linux certifications. I am left to wonder what happened inside the LPI to precipitate this change.

Old policy, old LPI

The original LPI policy recognized the corruption in the certification "business". From one of the old LPI Certification pages:

LPI is a non-profit organization involved only with setting standards for professional certification. It is neutral to vendors of Linux distributions, training, etc. For LPI, certification is not (LPI emphasis) a marketing tool to push product.

Regarding expiration of certifications, the original LPI position was that certifications were good for a lifetime. Of course, everyone recognizes that a certification earned in 2002 is not as current as one earned in 2006, and even less valuable than one earned in 2010, but that doesn't invalidate it. Employers and technicians understand this. At one time, the LPI understood this.

I want to mention that the LPI staff I interacted with in the early days was nothing less than professional, efficient, and courteous. Working with the LPI was a breath of fresh air. It was a team that was dedicated to free software philosophy and had a bold vision for Linux professionals. I don't know if the same leadership and staff still work there.

New policy, new LPI

The recent change in expiration policy is not the first. A few years into the program, LPI officially changed the policy on expiration so that certifications expired after 10 years. This concerned me a little, but a lot can change in that amount of time so it didn't seem unreasonable.

Now, LPI recommends that certification tests be taken every two years with a forced expiration after five years. This policy sounds exactly like the vendor based certification programs that were a source of angst for me in the past.

The official explanation is that rapid expiration is needed "due to rapid changes and improvements in the Linux operating system but that consultations with industry leaders indicated that a mandatory five year recertification policy was sufficient at this time". What an incredible load of NewSpeak. If anything, the Linux operating system (the kernel) is changing more slowly that it was when the LPI was formed.

In 1999, the kernel was still at version 2.2. Important sysadmin features that have arrived since then include Netfilter (iptables), the ext3 file system, SE Linux, USB support, hotplug, improved multiprocessor suuport, and lots of hardware drivers. Looking forward from today's 2.6 kernel, most of the new features are for high-end multiprocessor systems. Even the 3D accelerated graphics work being done in X has less of an impact on Linux administration than the changes that came before.

Another red flag in the statement is the "consultations with industry leaders" part. A quick peek at the LPI sponsors and you'll see IBM and Novell in prominent positions. Has the LPI been taken over by bean counters who see an untapped revenue stream? IBM, and particularly Novell, have mastered the art of squeezing maximum dollars out of their certification programs. Finally, the end of statement left me with the impression that the LPI would like to expire certifications even faster and that this could happen in the near future.

The LPI statement is nearly a 180 degree turn from the original policy. The goal of the non-profit LPI used to be to create a critical mass of certified Linux professionals to ease the fear of deployment for PHBs. This is pure speculation, but maybe this new policy means the critical mass has been reached. Maybe Linux is mainstream and the LPI backers now want a return on their investment. Whatever the reason, the whole thing smells.

More reasons the policy is bad

I could spend a lot of time explaining why the core concepts in Unix/Linux are timeless. The "ls" command still works pretty much the same as it did 30 years ago. Understanding how to string commands together using pipes, building complex solutions from simple parts, has always been the strength of Unix/Linux. That hasn't changed and it won't with each kernel release. Even the main package formats (RPM and DEB) haven't changed much. The basic install/uninstall/query options still work like they did years ago.

The knowledge and skills I demonstrated on the LPI exams in 2001 and 2002 won't be forgotten when the new recertification deadline passes, but the LPI will pretend they have. The LPI program has become like any other vendor based certification program. Part sales, part resume builder, part hype. I believe this will drive people away from the LPI and make Linux less relevant in the long run. I am sadly disappointed.

Better Red than dead

All this leaves me with a dilemma regarding Linux certification in the future. If I'm going to climb aboard a vendor/sales/certification treadmill again, and that's a big IF, it will probably be Red Hat. They have the highest market share, mind share, and a more recognizable certification. While I haven't always agreed with decisions Red Hat has made, they have been honest, stalwart defenders of Linux and made the right choices when it counted. If I'm forced to take new Linux certification tests, I rather be Red (Hat) than dead.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.