[Retric]

So a C# .net developer should know what?

Basic .net developer: (1 or more JS frameworks ex: Angular), HTML, JavaScript, CSS, C#, .net, LINQ, ORM(nHibernate), XML, SQL, T-SQL, …

Full stack: That plus, basic network administration (TCP-IP, BGP, routing tables?), basic windows administration (installation, security, back, scripts, deployment, troubleshooting), basic IIS administration (setup, matinee, troubleshooting), basic DB administration (deployment, troubleshooting, backups, clustering, profiling etc.), basic team foundation server administration, ...

Then to get an actual job you should know exactly the correct stack, including whatever wacky tools the team likes…

PS: And people wonder why they have trouble finding good developers.

[fit2rule]

Well, you may think that standards are too high, but on the flipside, yes: the expectation that you are able to deal with such a suite of tools is also out there. Maybe this reflects on the quality of the stack more than anything else - on the other hand, .Net and C# development is pitched as a reason to not have to know any of those things, too.

[Retric]

The problem IMO is out of the 100 or so developers I have worked with none of them fit that profile and IMO that's completely ok. Granted, I actually cover most of that except the networking side, and know a few other that come close. (Which is probably why I am standing up a continuous integration server today instead of actually coding.) But, it really just seems wasteful as the value of teams is they let people specialize.

[fit2rule]

Nobody said everyone should be a full stack developer - just that more developers should consider the benefits of becoming more proficient with the layers of the stack with which they're not competent.