I thought it was a joke on Moe's Family Feed Bag -- IE the Simpsons.
@Moe Fwacky is the person being referenced. Basically they used to be a mod and bugged Tube for a tech forum separate from G&T until he actually did it.
+7
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
I thought it was a joke on Moe's Family Feed Bag -- IE the Simpsons.
Moe Fwacky is the person being referenced. Basically they used to be a mod and bugged Tube for a tech forum separate from G&T until he actually did it.
I've been poking at a CCNP study guide and had a couple of questions.
- The book does not seem to consistently distinguish between 'packet' and 'frame'. That is, they'll be talking about Layer 2 and call the PDU a packet. Is it just colloquial to use 'packet' everywhere, or is this the book being weird?
- Their definition of CAM (in the appendix) feels extremely off: "A high performance table used to correlate MAC addresses to switch interfaces that they are attached to." Based on the text (and wiki, etc) CAM seems to just be a type of memory, suited for different tasks than RAM. Is it somehow useful (at this stage / in this context) to just focus on how it facilitates forwarding?
- Where I would expect 'transmitted' or 'sent' (or similar), the book uses 'advertised'. Is this a general colloquialism? Specific to control plane traffic? The book trying to make fletch happen?
Frame vs Packet is about what OSI later you are talking about. At Layer 2 (data link) you have a Frame with the MAC addresses. At Layer 3 (network) you have a Packet with the IP addresses. A Frame encapsulates (wraps) a Packet. You cannot have a Packet without a Frame, but you could have a Frame without a Packet.
A PDU (protocol data unit) can refer to a Frame, Packet (IP), Segment (TCP), or Datagram (UDP). It is just the generic term for any single bundle of information.
CAM is where the switch port stores it's list of MAC addresses (physical devices) it can see to allow the switch to forward frames out the correct switch port. Its just faster to access than if it were stored in main memory to speed up traffic flow through the switch.
Transmitted and Sent are the same thing. Refers to anything and everything that leaves a switch port. Advertising means "I know some config/state info and I need to send that info to other devices on the network". So an Advertisement will be Sent/Transmitted, but most things that are Sent/Transmitted are not Advertisements.
But Cisco are weird in that they tend to use terms in their own way that may not correspond to typical usage, but their tests expect you to know how Cisco uses it, not how anyone else does.
SiliconStew on
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
CAM is basically reverse RAM, it does constant-time searches. It is used for doing lookups like vlan/MAC address -> port or whatever, and referring to that address table as "the CAM" is rather colloquial but people would normally get it. Woo Cisco terminology!
It is like defining RAM as "where we keep track of all the game objects and their position/state" as a game developer, which may be true and the usage but isn't what "RAM" is or describing how that does it.
But Cisco are weird in that they tend to use terms in their own way that may not correspond to typical usage, but their tests expect you to know how Cisco uses it, not how anyone else does.
Totally this. Cisco just always does things a little differently. (Or, sometimes, a lot differently.)
One of the big examples I can think of is how most switch vendors define VLANs in terms of tagged and untagged ports, while Cisco defines it in terms of access and trunk ports. I've been doing this for years and I it still takes mental effort for me to translate from the Cisco VLAN paradigm to the industry-standard VLAN paradigm and vice versa.
Or how Cisco ASAs use isakmp and ipsec commands for VPN tunnels, while almost everybody else uses phase 1 and phase 2. (IMO, setting up a cross-vendor VPN tunnel where one side is Cisco and the other is not is always a pain in the ass.)
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
The Cons of Open-source Software
Security becomes a major issue. Anyone can be hacked. However, the risk is far less when it comes to proprietary software. Due to the nature of open-source software allowing anyone to update the code, the risk of downloading malicious code is much higher. One source referred to using open-source software as “eating from a dirty fork.” When you reach in the drawer for a clean fork, you could be pulling out a dirty utensil. That analogy is right on the money.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Literally had a guy argue with me about that on MySQL vs MSSQL at work.
Security through obscurity is not security, and that's all closed source is. Many eyes find problems quickly, sure, but it's generally patched quickly as well instead of forgotten about for days, weeks, months, or years because closed source stuff isn't about fixing bugs, it's about pushing features.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
I think it is, it's just an utterly crap form of security that's not worth it vs. the advantages of open source that you rightly note.
the problem is that it usually only fools people on the inside
it isn't going to slow down an actual attacker in most cases because they will be moving at lower level where they aren't looking at names to figure out what systems do what.
Even in open source, most hackers don't peruse over the source code to find weakness. Some do but most just look up actual published vulnerabilities for versions, just like they do for microsoft's stuff.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Even in open source, most hackers don't peruse over the source code to find weakness. Some do but most just look up actual published vulnerabilities for versions, just like they do for microsoft's stuff.
I mean shit, the shellshock vulnerability hung out in the bash codebase for 25 years before anybody noticed it.
Open/closed source really doesn't matter for security.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Literally had a guy argue with me about that on MySQL vs MSSQL at work.
Security through obscurity is not security, and that's all closed source is. Many eyes find problems quickly, sure, but it's generally patched quickly as well instead of forgotten about for days, weeks, months, or years because closed source stuff isn't about fixing bugs, it's about pushing features.
It's even worse because there's very little incentive for logging and documentation. So if someone breaks in and you don't log their entry, how do you even know if you have a problem in the first place?
Anyone have a recommendation on a service that can monitor SQL logs automatically and generate reports on suspicious activity? It's being requested on a security audit and I'd like to find something simple that I won't have to spend 50 hours setting up and managing.
I am basically being told that we need to have a system that can audit the administrator activity in the event someone manages to hack into SQL and steal data.
Because if you're going to attempt to squeeze that big black monster into your slot you will need to be able to take at least 12 inches or else you're going to have a bad time...
Y'all got any suggestions for a SATA RAID card that supports 16tb drives? The built in VROC raid controller in this T40 server I have won't work with 16tb drives. I just need a RAID1 on these 2 drives for a backup appliance. I was doing some research and the card needs LBA48 to support the drives I intend to use.
Obligatory: Don't generate a shit ton of logs that literally no one will ever look at for the sake of meeting a compliance check. If they're worth logging they're worth alerting on and reviewing.
What is this I don't even.
+8
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
Obligatory: Don't generate a shit ton of logs that literally no one will ever look at for the sake of meeting a compliance check. If they're worth logging they're worth alerting on and reviewing.
Getting people to log, even just for compliance, is often half the battle, unfortunately. Sometimes the only way folks will prioritize the work is under threat of massive regulatory penalty.
But yeah, if you have it but don't use it that's just stupid. Especially now that most logging solutions also have integrated alerts/reporting.
I had an unsatisfying conversation with my manager today.
Me: "I delegated TaskA to Junior Employee and he completely flubbed it. I felt like I gave him very clear instructions and it was a very simple task."
Boss: "You shouldn't have delegated that to him. I don't see TaskA as being within his role."
Me: "Um, okay. Your boss, a C-Level exec, told me to. Not recently, but a while back he was very clear to me that I should delegate tasks like TaskA to Junior's team."
Boss: "Huh, weird. Yeah, that's not my vision. Sorry about that."
Me: "No problem. Still, I don't think that excuses Junior. I gave him simple instructions on a simple task, and he made some very basic mistakes."
Boss: "That's not his role though."
Me: "I hear that. But he thinks TaskA is his role, and he was willing to take it on. I'm not going to delegate things that are in his role if he can't follow simple instructions."
Boss: "We're still trying to delineate responsibilities around TaskA. I don't have details, but see TaskA as being within the realm of another team. We just don't have approval to build out that team's headcount."
Me: "Yeah, I know headcount is an issue. But we can have either limited headcount, or hire inexperienced employees. Either quantity or quality. We can't slack on both. We can't have people who aren't carrying their weight."
Boss: "Junior shouldn't have to carry TaskA."
:rotate:
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Makes me wonder what the hiring process looks like, too. I know we get super scared of letting certain people go because, fuck, we'll be trawling through hiring services for 6-8 months before we'll find a replacement and by then everything will be on fire.
Y'all got any suggestions for a SATA RAID card that supports 16tb drives? The built in VROC raid controller in this T40 server I have won't work with 16tb drives. I just need a RAID1 on these 2 drives for a backup appliance. I was doing some research and the card needs LBA48 to support the drives I intend to use.
Nah, that feels like a forest/trees thing - "Oh, it's not in their role, they're excused from responsibility" - that's not how anything works. Over-taylorization and elimination of responsibility as a result is stupid.
Nah, that feels like a forest/trees thing - "Oh, it's not in their role, they're excused from responsibility" - that's not how anything works. Over-taylorization and elimination of responsibility as a result is stupid.
Junior isn't related to anybody, I can guarantee that. I was there when he was hired.
There are multiple factors at play here, and forest/trees is definitely one of them. We're understaffed in terms of both quantity and quality of employees, and it affects my manager too. The culture of my department is to look for expediency. Perhaps he just didn't want to spend precious mental CPU cycles thinking about this, when there was a convenient excuse to dismiss the problem.
Alternatively: my manager and I have had many conversations about role responsibilities, and he may have come into this conversation thinking that this was going to be about that, rather than Junior's general professional skills like 'communication' and 'following instructions.'
Another possibility: there's a reason we're understaffed in both quality and quantity. We don't want to pay for good IT people, full stop. It's hard enough in Seattle where big tech companies siphon talent off from smaller players. We can't compete with Amazon or Microsoft on keeping tech talent. Maybe he doesn't want to spend precious time interviewing replacements for Junior. Maybe he is pessimistic he could get anybody better than Junior in the competitive Seattle market. Both of those are perfectly understandable reasons. I don't think they're good reasons, but I can at least sympathize.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
One thing I like to remind people about where I work is that I negotiated my starting salary to the very maximum of the range they offer for my position. I wanted to work for the company because I like their politics and values. We're explicitly pro-gay, pro-BLM, etc and we've actually done a lot of community action to support those values.
But they wanted to drastically underpay me and in the interviews I channeled my internal Don Draper and imagined that I had a big swinging dick with "give me the money" tattooed on the girthy shaft
I got the salary I wanted. But I doubt other people in my department showed half as much hubris. Most of the people in my department are underpaid for their talent - they're smart, hard-working people. I'm pretty happy with the composition of our department right now.
But once in a while, we get somebody whose talent matches the low pay.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Y'all got any suggestions for a SATA RAID card that supports 16tb drives? The built in VROC raid controller in this T40 server I have won't work with 16tb drives. I just need a RAID1 on these 2 drives for a backup appliance. I was doing some research and the card needs LBA48 to support the drives I intend to use.
Depending on internal HR processes for firing people, it might've just been that any work outside the role is completely irrelevant, so manager was getting that Jr is incompetent but can't really acknowledge it in this case.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Depending on internal HR processes for firing people, it might've just been that any work outside the role is completely irrelevant, so manager was getting that Jr is incompetent but can't really acknowledge it in this case.
Our roles aren't clearly defined enough for this to be the case.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Depending on internal HR processes for firing people, it might've just been that any work outside the role is completely irrelevant, so manager was getting that Jr is incompetent but can't really acknowledge it in this case.
Or "I don't want to deal with this, so I'm going to ignore it until it goes away". This is... frighteningly common. More entertaining is when groups reorg and people frantically try to build up people as "great" so they can foist them on other groups.
+3
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
Depending on internal HR processes for firing people, it might've just been that any work outside the role is completely irrelevant, so manager was getting that Jr is incompetent but can't really acknowledge it in this case.
Or "I don't want to deal with this, so I'm going to ignore it until it goes away". This is... frighteningly common. More entertaining is when groups reorg and people frantically try to build up people as "great" so they can foist them on other groups.
This is depressingly common. But it also burns bridges long-term.
One thing I like to remind people about where I work is that I negotiated my starting salary to the very maximum of the range they offer for my position. I wanted to work for the company because I like their politics and values. We're explicitly pro-gay, pro-BLM, etc and we've actually done a lot of community action to support those values.
But they wanted to drastically underpay me and in the interviews I channeled my internal Don Draper and imagined that I had a big swinging dick with "give me the money" tattooed on the girthy shaft
I got the salary I wanted. But I doubt other people in my department showed half as much hubris. Most of the people in my department are underpaid for their talent - they're smart, hard-working people. I'm pretty happy with the composition of our department right now.
But once in a while, we get somebody whose talent matches the low pay.
I just got lead through this interview process. A recruiter reached out to me for a position. Talked to the company. Talked to the government lead. Everyone seemed to like me.
I really like my current position, so when they asked for my salary I said n+20K. All the 'I need this job, and don't want to loose this opportunity' energy wasn't present, because I was just going though the process because it was easy and I was a bit curious.
They sent me an offer letter last week and now I really have to think about it.
Good lesson to future me, for the next time I'm actually job hunting.
One thing I like to remind people about where I work is that I negotiated my starting salary to the very maximum of the range they offer for my position. I wanted to work for the company because I like their politics and values. We're explicitly pro-gay, pro-BLM, etc and we've actually done a lot of community action to support those values.
But they wanted to drastically underpay me and in the interviews I channeled my internal Don Draper and imagined that I had a big swinging dick with "give me the money" tattooed on the girthy shaft
I got the salary I wanted. But I doubt other people in my department showed half as much hubris. Most of the people in my department are underpaid for their talent - they're smart, hard-working people. I'm pretty happy with the composition of our department right now.
But once in a while, we get somebody whose talent matches the low pay.
I just got lead through this interview process. A recruiter reached out to me for a position. Talked to the company. Talked to the government lead. Everyone seemed to like me.
I really like my current position, so when they asked for my salary I said n+20K. All the 'I need this job, and don't want to loose this opportunity' energy wasn't present, because I was just going though the process because it was easy and I was a bit curious.
They sent me an offer letter last week and now I really have to think about it.
Good lesson to future me, for the next time I'm actually job hunting.
Seriously seriously seriously. My ability to negotiate jobs changed drastically when I started interviewing without caring. I know that's a statement from a position of job privelege, so I hope you'll forgive me for it in pursuit of the advice. The best time to interview for jobs is when you don't need one at all, and frankly don't even WANT the job, because you can be as gutsy as you want during the interview. Demand salary info. I realized I could ask for WAY more than I had by doing this and substantially changed my negotiating by just doing fishing interviews.
I've been doing a fair amount of internal interviews as well. They always give me bouts of anxiety but I'm much more comfortable talking about myself now.
I was the second choice for at least the last 2 positions.
Posts
I thought it was a joke on Moe's Family Feed Bag -- IE the Simpsons.
They're what you'd expect. Fed is still capturing the extent of the damage on their side.
@Moe Fwacky is the person being referenced. Basically they used to be a mod and bugged Tube for a tech forum separate from G&T until he actually did it.
"used to be"? They're still a mod!
I've been poking at a CCNP study guide and had a couple of questions.
- The book does not seem to consistently distinguish between 'packet' and 'frame'. That is, they'll be talking about Layer 2 and call the PDU a packet. Is it just colloquial to use 'packet' everywhere, or is this the book being weird?
- Their definition of CAM (in the appendix) feels extremely off: "A high performance table used to correlate MAC addresses to switch interfaces that they are attached to." Based on the text (and wiki, etc) CAM seems to just be a type of memory, suited for different tasks than RAM. Is it somehow useful (at this stage / in this context) to just focus on how it facilitates forwarding?
- Where I would expect 'transmitted' or 'sent' (or similar), the book uses 'advertised'. Is this a general colloquialism? Specific to control plane traffic? The book trying to make fletch happen?
Thanks.
A PDU (protocol data unit) can refer to a Frame, Packet (IP), Segment (TCP), or Datagram (UDP). It is just the generic term for any single bundle of information.
CAM is where the switch port stores it's list of MAC addresses (physical devices) it can see to allow the switch to forward frames out the correct switch port. Its just faster to access than if it were stored in main memory to speed up traffic flow through the switch.
Transmitted and Sent are the same thing. Refers to anything and everything that leaves a switch port. Advertising means "I know some config/state info and I need to send that info to other devices on the network". So an Advertisement will be Sent/Transmitted, but most things that are Sent/Transmitted are not Advertisements.
But Cisco are weird in that they tend to use terms in their own way that may not correspond to typical usage, but their tests expect you to know how Cisco uses it, not how anyone else does.
It is like defining RAM as "where we keep track of all the game objects and their position/state" as a game developer, which may be true and the usage but isn't what "RAM" is or describing how that does it.
I appreciate the help. Thanks again.
Totally this. Cisco just always does things a little differently. (Or, sometimes, a lot differently.)
One of the big examples I can think of is how most switch vendors define VLANs in terms of tagged and untagged ports, while Cisco defines it in terms of access and trunk ports. I've been doing this for years and I it still takes mental effort for me to translate from the Cisco VLAN paradigm to the industry-standard VLAN paradigm and vice versa.
Or how Cisco ASAs use isakmp and ipsec commands for VPN tunnels, while almost everybody else uses phase 1 and phase 2. (IMO, setting up a cross-vendor VPN tunnel where one side is Cisco and the other is not is always a pain in the ass.)
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
https://thwack.solarwinds.com/t5/Geek-Speak-Blogs/The-Pros-and-Cons-of-Open-source-Tools/ba-p/478665
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Security through obscurity is not security, and that's all closed source is. Many eyes find problems quickly, sure, but it's generally patched quickly as well instead of forgotten about for days, weeks, months, or years because closed source stuff isn't about fixing bugs, it's about pushing features.
I think it is, it's just an utterly crap form of security that's not worth it vs. the advantages of open source that you rightly note.
the problem is that it usually only fools people on the inside
it isn't going to slow down an actual attacker in most cases because they will be moving at lower level where they aren't looking at names to figure out what systems do what.
I mean shit, the shellshock vulnerability hung out in the bash codebase for 25 years before anybody noticed it.
Open/closed source really doesn't matter for security.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
https://www.zdnet.com/article/a-second-hacking-group-has-targeted-solarwinds-systems/
It's even worse because there's very little incentive for logging and documentation. So if someone breaks in and you don't log their entry, how do you even know if you have a problem in the first place?
@Moe Fwacky
I am basically being told that we need to have a system that can audit the administrator activity in the event someone manages to hack into SQL and steal data.
If you can't shell out the cash for splunk then look into
grafana/loki: Like Prometheus, but for logs.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
Getting people to log, even just for compliance, is often half the battle, unfortunately. Sometimes the only way folks will prioritize the work is under threat of massive regulatory penalty.
But yeah, if you have it but don't use it that's just stupid. Especially now that most logging solutions also have integrated alerts/reporting.
Me: "I delegated TaskA to Junior Employee and he completely flubbed it. I felt like I gave him very clear instructions and it was a very simple task."
Boss: "You shouldn't have delegated that to him. I don't see TaskA as being within his role."
Me: "Um, okay. Your boss, a C-Level exec, told me to. Not recently, but a while back he was very clear to me that I should delegate tasks like TaskA to Junior's team."
Boss: "Huh, weird. Yeah, that's not my vision. Sorry about that."
Me: "No problem. Still, I don't think that excuses Junior. I gave him simple instructions on a simple task, and he made some very basic mistakes."
Boss: "That's not his role though."
Me: "I hear that. But he thinks TaskA is his role, and he was willing to take it on. I'm not going to delegate things that are in his role if he can't follow simple instructions."
Boss: "We're still trying to delineate responsibilities around TaskA. I don't have details, but see TaskA as being within the realm of another team. We just don't have approval to build out that team's headcount."
Me: "Yeah, I know headcount is an issue. But we can have either limited headcount, or hire inexperienced employees. Either quantity or quality. We can't slack on both. We can't have people who aren't carrying their weight."
Boss: "Junior shouldn't have to carry TaskA."
:rotate:
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
or they have accepted positions by the time we've made a decision :rotate:
I gave up on trying to do a hardware RAID and just used AHCI and a software RAID in windows. It should be good enough.
Nah, that feels like a forest/trees thing - "Oh, it's not in their role, they're excused from responsibility" - that's not how anything works. Over-taylorization and elimination of responsibility as a result is stupid.
Junior isn't related to anybody, I can guarantee that. I was there when he was hired.
There are multiple factors at play here, and forest/trees is definitely one of them. We're understaffed in terms of both quantity and quality of employees, and it affects my manager too. The culture of my department is to look for expediency. Perhaps he just didn't want to spend precious mental CPU cycles thinking about this, when there was a convenient excuse to dismiss the problem.
Alternatively: my manager and I have had many conversations about role responsibilities, and he may have come into this conversation thinking that this was going to be about that, rather than Junior's general professional skills like 'communication' and 'following instructions.'
Another possibility: there's a reason we're understaffed in both quality and quantity. We don't want to pay for good IT people, full stop. It's hard enough in Seattle where big tech companies siphon talent off from smaller players. We can't compete with Amazon or Microsoft on keeping tech talent. Maybe he doesn't want to spend precious time interviewing replacements for Junior. Maybe he is pessimistic he could get anybody better than Junior in the competitive Seattle market. Both of those are perfectly understandable reasons. I don't think they're good reasons, but I can at least sympathize.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
But they wanted to drastically underpay me and in the interviews I channeled my internal Don Draper and imagined that I had a big swinging dick with "give me the money" tattooed on the girthy shaft
I got the salary I wanted. But I doubt other people in my department showed half as much hubris. Most of the people in my department are underpaid for their talent - they're smart, hard-working people. I'm pretty happy with the composition of our department right now.
But once in a while, we get somebody whose talent matches the low pay.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Not comparable at all but ok.
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Our roles aren't clearly defined enough for this to be the case.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Or "I don't want to deal with this, so I'm going to ignore it until it goes away". This is... frighteningly common. More entertaining is when groups reorg and people frantically try to build up people as "great" so they can foist them on other groups.
This is depressingly common. But it also burns bridges long-term.
I just got lead through this interview process. A recruiter reached out to me for a position. Talked to the company. Talked to the government lead. Everyone seemed to like me.
I really like my current position, so when they asked for my salary I said n+20K. All the 'I need this job, and don't want to loose this opportunity' energy wasn't present, because I was just going though the process because it was easy and I was a bit curious.
They sent me an offer letter last week and now I really have to think about it.
Good lesson to future me, for the next time I'm actually job hunting.
Seriously seriously seriously. My ability to negotiate jobs changed drastically when I started interviewing without caring. I know that's a statement from a position of job privelege, so I hope you'll forgive me for it in pursuit of the advice. The best time to interview for jobs is when you don't need one at all, and frankly don't even WANT the job, because you can be as gutsy as you want during the interview. Demand salary info. I realized I could ask for WAY more than I had by doing this and substantially changed my negotiating by just doing fishing interviews.
I was the second choice for at least the last 2 positions.