it is absolutely standard that it writes to the install location, it has to be modified as any install like this has to be. But you have to modify that behaviour.

@JaredBusch said in VyOS Port Address Translation for HTTPS:

@scottalanmiller said in VyOS Port Address Translation for HTTPS:

Got it working. The firewall rule was in the wrong section of the firewall.

You had it on eth0 local instead of eth0 in?

Yuppers.

That's one of those hotfixes that suck because it really has to be implemented ASAP.

@scottalanmiller said in Recovering Archived files via .OST:

@Dashrender said in Recovering Archived files via .OST:

I enforce small email quotas more to force people to clean up their shit than because I'm worried about the size on the server. But perhaps I shouldn't even worry about that.

I lean towards "don't worry about it" most of the time. But if quotas exist to force people to clean up, that rules out PSTs as that bypasses the cleanup requirement and, in fact, makes it far worse.

the only people who have PSTs in my environment are those that don't have quotas (management). The PSTs are mostly for archiving, but a few people still live and die by that old data. I should just reimport it and forget about it.

@scottalanmiller These were ordered and installed ~2 weeks ago.

I posted about it here.

@JaredBusch said in Hyper-V - 3 VM migrations to new host:

@Mike-Davis said in Hyper-V - 3 VM migrations to new host:

Were both of the Hosts domain joined?

Yes everything was domain joined. Honestly, they should always be domain joined.
You still need to allow constrained delegation though.
https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/matthts/2012/06/10/configuring-kerberos-constrained-delegation-for-hyper-v-management/

The old host is Server 2008 R2 and the new host is running Server 2012 R2 if that makes a difference.

This makes a HUGE difference. Hyper-V was completely redone for Server 2012+

In this instance, I would export and import.

not true

even ws2016 hyper-v has something from pre-2008 (and especially azure fork -out, for example erasure coding implementation, load balancing etc)

There are multiple examples of powershell scripts that will email users with near expiring passwords. I really need to get off my ass and set on up on the DC at a few of my clients with constant problem users...

For those stumbling in here down the road, the current consensus is that FreePBX is the better option for your new PBX. Elastix 4 did release, but is not being updated enough to remain a contender at this point.

Even I've got workflow apps running and a new one is being built over the weekend by a friend for quoting. So quick and easy.

@scottalanmiller said in D-Link DSR-250n router port configuration:

If it was good gear or well known gear, it might have made sense. But D-Link stuff isn't worth saving.

Preach it!

I know a lot of people like D-Link, but I had issues with multiple pieces of equipment from D-Link a long time ago and have refused to ever look at it since.

I know that is honestly bad on my part, as I should not rule something out forever, but with all the newer option, just no reason to ever go back to it.

Just deleting the contents, its 2 years old, and the user didn't even knew it existed and hasn't accessed it.

Thanks guys.

PluralSight is pretty good, and very cheap

@JaredBusch

Cool I'll give that a read. Thanks

@Mike-Davis Assume everything dumb that could be done has been done down there. What a mess.

I think that this decision has to come down to... is this a career change that you want? If this is what you WANT to do, then it is a huge opportunity to build your resume and experience. If this is not something that you want, this could suck big time. it's more about you and your goals than about career options.

Remember that this is backup. So if the backup system fails you have options like...

Taking a new backup from the live systems. Offlining the limping array and taking a full backup of it before attempting a restore Doing a backup/restore rather than an array recovery

All of these things make RAID 6's risks minimal. This isn't the only copy of anything, it's a backup. And it is not subject to availability risks (at least not in the way that live data is) so things that cause availability issues are not significant.

@BRRABill said in Accessing a Linux Server via SSH:

@scottalanmiller said

The default of what is to copy, paste and hit return?

PUTTY.

Be default when you right click something to copy, it copies it and pastes it and then hits return.

I guess perhaps just highlighting it copies it? I like the Windows method.

No it does not. I thought maybe you were thinking this but did not want to imply it. That's a misunderstanding of what is happening. It only does that IF your Windows environment and your actions are copying a carriage return into the clipboard (which Windows does by default.) This has nothing to do with PuTTY and is all about your Windows desktop AND it only does this if YOU make it happen, it does not do that for the rest of us. We don't copy the carriage return into the clipboard unless we want it. Windows makes this easy to control as a feature, but it is an invisible feature of the Windows environment so if you are not a Windows power user, you might not be aware that there is an interface to it that you are misusing.

PuTTY simply does what Windows tells it to do, PuTTY has no default behaviour like you are imagining.

@scottalanmiller said in Light Gaming Desktop:

@BBigford said in Light Gaming Desktop:

@scottalanmiller said in Light Gaming Desktop:

@travisdh1 said in Light Gaming Desktop:

@Kelly said in Light Gaming Desktop:

In that price range it is hard to build for better or less than OEMs. I've had good experiences with iBuyPower machines, but there are so many options. A refurb might be a good direction to go too.

Yeah, it's hard to beat iBuyPower or CyberPower most of the time. A couple weeks ago I got some friends kid a system from CyberPower, I don't think they've seen him since we got it plugged in.

We found a super cheap CyberPower that might be the way that she goes.

I.... very much disagree. As a prior boutique builder, there is a lot to be said about pre-built rigs vs. building your own. Has little to do with the experience, or saving money. It's the exact comparison I would use as another thread going on that's based around buying a Synology box or building up a SAM-SD. They both serve pretty much the same function, one just performs a lot better but doesn't have a single point of contact for support.

No one said that SAM-SD doesn't have a single point of contact for support, it certainly can. We only said that a NAS must have a single point of contact for support or it can't be a NAS. That one must have that option does not preclude that the other cannot have it.

Yeah I misunderstood. 😄

But I won't pull this thread off topic in my misunderstanding! Won't do it!

@BBigford said in SAN data transfer - very slow:

So the bottleneck is 1Gb/s and 50MB/s is about half of your theoretical max of around 100-120 MB/s so really, that is not too bad when you take into account the TCP Windowing overhead and latency and such. Could it go faster? Maybe. Reasonably? Not much.

Can you do a rough break down on the math of how you got the theoretical, please? So what are my options, short of waiting +48 hours, or having the data physically shipped to me?

Well 1GigE is your network bottleneck from the description, everything faster than that doesn't have a direct connection so aren't much of a factor (other than allowing the TCP Windows to mismatch causing more overhead.) So we start with 1,000 Mb/s.

1,000 / 8 = 125 MB/s (bits to bytes.)

So that is the theoretical max of the link with zero overhead. Rule of thumb is to assume that the actual max is 80% of Ethernet. That is 100MB/s.

So 100MB/s is pretty much the theoretical fastest that you could get over pure GigE without any bridging, switching or other slowing factors.

No consider that you are putting storage protocols onto that which means that you have some bottlenecks, at least from time to time, from the storage system so you likely will not be able to feed that perfectly. Then each conversion from Ethernet to whatever the WAN link is will add overhead in the form of the translation (different window sizes and other efficiency issues.) And then you have to add in the latency of the link - latency causes a throughput reduction when we are talking about a reliable protocol like TCP. This would not be the case for a streaming UDP connection so much, but you can't send storage data in an unreliable, best effort way so that doesn't matter. You are forced to wait for receipt responses.

Put this all together, and cutting your connection in half is normal.

@coliver said in New MailUsers from Account - Office 365:

Resurrecting an old thread.

We ran into this issue again after updating to the most recent version of Azure AD Sync. We needed to set the mailnickname attribute in AD for the mail users to be created again. This was in addition to having the targetAddress declared.

Thanks for following up 🙂