----- On Jul 14, 2020, at 1:14 PM, Matthew Petach <mpet...@netflight.com> wrote:
Hi, > Depending on how the interviewer responds gives me a pretty good idea how much > clue the people I'd be working with have, and how well they work > collaboratively even with people they don't really know. If they respond well > on their feet, and give me better inputs, I respond with a better answer. This is exactly what I would be looking for when I interview. Make me regret asking the question, and you'll have my vote. I like to work with people that are smarter than me. But I also prefer generic questions that are open to the candidate's imagination. Not so much to make their lives difficult, but to see how they think. For example, I'll draw a small network topology and ask which protocol they prefer (most of the time that's either OSPF or BGP). "Ok, fully configured network, after a power outage the power is back on. Tell me what happens and how routes are exchanged". OSPF areas? EBGP or IBGP? You make it up, whatever you're comfortable with. If they start explaining how R1 starts transmitting hello packets, you know that they think different from someone that starts to explain how R3 and R4 are ABRs. But whatever answer I get, I dig until I get an "I don't know". Like "ok, what information is contained in that hello packet?". Etc, etc. But I expect nobody to know everything, especially not stuff that can be easily googled. I've been on both sides many times, and like other commenters say, an interview goes both ways. Thanks, Sabri
