Third or Fourth time through Fuller House. New season is out in three weeks.

@scottalanmiller said in DFW SpiceCorps - 11/29/2018 - Join Us Remotely if You Cannot Attend in Person!: @pchiodo and I are trying to make it. But we are driving a van and a truck from NY to Dallas that day, so it is going to be really hard to make. You can always join remotely from the van. Have a safe trip!

@flaxking said in SQL security over the LAN: @tonyshowoff said in SQL security over the LAN: @flaxking said in SQL security over the LAN: @tonyshowoff said in SQL security over the LAN: @flaxking That may work and is worth a try, but it's likely not to work because the client is passing along to SQL Server and it's not known whether or not they implemented, or allow, encrypted traffic within their SQL Server connection library. Even if implemented in the library, it doesn't mean the client allows it, and even may be intentionally disabled for God only knows what reason. It isn't an SQL client, it's an application which just connects to SQL Server or passes raw SQL along to an application server to avoid client connection licensing limits. How would that avoid licencing? The MS SQL licencing doesn't care how a user connects, you have to get CALs for the actual users using it no matter the method used. (Unless using SQL Express) Because it opens one connection between the application server and the SQL Server rather than a new one for every single client. You can avoid user CAL issues because it's one connection from one user. I can't speak to there possibility being a point in time when this was true, but it is not true now. You have to get CALs for each actual person, even if they themselves are not in direct communication with the MS SQL Server I am aware but it isn't relevant, that's just why people do it in the ERP world in addition to having license control over their own client application. There's no inherent transparent encryption with a third party library connecting to SQL Server though. It should be straight forward from the development perspective considering they must be using a fairly modern one to be using SQL over SMB2, but if the company is basically dismissing concerns over encryption by saying "it's up to you to secure your network" that's basically saying "what's encryption? We're morons."