Why change something that we have aboslutely no issues with? It wouldn't save us any money, and we are intimately familiar with how PBX In A Flash is built and are able to adequately support it. So...???
In any rate, I'm going to try to get this back on topic... 
@scottalanmiller said in PCI over Ethernet?:
@anthonyh said in PCI over Ethernet?:
@aaronstuder said in PCI over Ethernet?:
@anthonyh said:
PBX In A Flash.
Why?
Why not? Except for this very specialized scenario, PIAF has worked beautifully and has saved us a shit ton of $$$$.
Saved you money compared to the standard alternatives of FreePBX or Elastix which are also free and their IVRs are very simple to use?
I'm confused. My understanding is PBX In A Flash is a variant of FreePBX. In fact the web interface says "FreePBX" all over it???
@aaronstuder said in PCI over Ethernet?:
@anthonyh said:
PBX In A Flash.
Why?
Why not? Except for this very specialized scenario, PIAF has worked beautifully and has saved us a shit ton of $$$$.
@aaronstuder said in PCI over Ethernet?:
@anthonyh What VoIP solution are you using?
PBX In A Flash.
@aaronstuder said in PCI over Ethernet?:
What happens when the physical server shits the bed? This seems like a big business risk.
This is why I'm asking this question. I'd like to incorporate it into our virtual environment if I can so that 1) it's included in our VM backups, and 2) it's covered under our HA pool in the event of some sort of hardware issue.
As of right now, if it took a shit I'd be shitting too.
@scottalanmiller Updated my OP to explain why this isn't done on the PBX.
@aaronstuder It does, but this is not just IVR. It's an IVR interface for one of our databases. People can call in and get status on stuff along with submit responses (like to postpone and/or update their information).
Hey Guys and Gals,
In our environment, we have ONE physical server left. This is because it is a specialized IVR system that interfaces with one of our databases (allows people to call in and check on status, postpone things, as well as update some information), and it utilizes these PCI voice cards. Ironically, we take the output of these cards and connect them to ATAs to interface with our VoIP system.
The system I am talking about is an IVR interface for our Jury Management System (I work for a court). It interfaces with said JMS system and allows Jurors to check when they need to report for jury duty and submit any responses requested based on the Juror Summons they received in the mail. They key in their badge number, their last name, and then based on their jury duty history are then presented with various options (check whether or not they need to report for jury duty, request an excuse from jury service if they are eligible for exclusion based on their jury duty history, update their juror information, respond to supplemental juror questions if there are any, etc.).
In the world of VMware, last I recall you can do PCI bus passthrough. Unfortunately, we are a XenServer shop and last I checked this feature does not exist with Xen.
So, this has me wondering...is there such a device that'll allow you to encapsulate the PCI bus over Ethernet? The idea being that we put these PCI cards in this magical box that is then IPed. On the IVR server, we install the magical drivers that allows the OS to interface with the box and essencially extend the PCI bus via IP.
Does such a thing exist?
I am an Alike user and, although they have their own faults, the software has been doing a decent job backing up my environment. I believe we are pushing their software pretty hard. I have ~100 VMs across 19 hosts. Once we get over the initial deployment and first backup, things are relatively smooth after that. They've made some good progress with their software over the years. There were some rocky times in the Alike 3.x days, and we eventually found a sweet spot with a "special" build of Alike 3.5 which I was running for a good 6 months plus without any fuss (was really nice). When I originally trialed the software back in 2014 they were really good about extending it without question. I believe I trialed the software for a good 3-4 months, and during my trial their support team treated me like I was a paid customer. My only wish is that their support was more reachable via phone (they like to communicate via email/tickets, which I understand)...but that'd drive up the cost of the software. When I've had major issues they've jumped on a conference call with me and done remote sessions. I believe their software does everything that PHDVirtual/Unitrends does, so you shouldn't lose any features.
I'm currently in the process of transitioning from Alike 3.5 to 4.2, which basically requires you to scrap and re-do your backups. Fortunately for me, I have the hardware to run both in parallel. I'm still working through the initial backups with 4.2, which are running into some snags (not unexpected), but their support has been responsive and helpful. I am hopeful things will iron out in sometime this week.
@Breffni-Potter said in XenServer: 3rd party support: who/where/how/$$ ??:
Maybe a tagging feature for profiles on here would be helpful?
i.e each user can tag themselves with what they can do so we know who is doing what.
i.e who are the AetherStore people? Who are the XenServer people? Who are Webroot people?
I think this is a nice idea. I think it would be good to know both paid support as well as other ML members who use it. We could possibly help each other out from time to time.
Anyone here have experience with the ZCS milter? I'm working on restricting a few of our distribution lists. I've found documentation on enabling it and granting/denying permission to send to distribution lists. However, I cannot find anything that explicitly states what the default permission is when the milter is enabled.
If I enable it, will the default be that nobody can send to any distribution list and I will need to grant everyone access? OR is the default allow all?
I want to be prepared for when I flip the switch.
Thanks!!
Welp, rebooting the host that the VM resided on did not clear up any disk space. Hmmm...
@Dashrender Yes, 2 TB LUN. All 16 hosts are attached to said LUN.
Hey, perhaps I can detatch/reattach the LUN? Shut down the VM first, of course.
Thoughts?? Would this trigger cleanup?
I'll start by rebooting the host the VM is running on and see if I get lucky...
So, are you saying I shouldn't migrate to a Netgear NAS?
All joking aside, it sounds like the consensus thus far is a reboot? I can cycle the hosts one by one...I suppose it's worth a try...
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer 6.5 Troubleshoot HBA SR Disk Space:
@anthonyh said in XenServer 6.5 Troubleshoot HBA SR Disk Space:
I have to say it's been a decent setup for what it is. I would prefer a vSAN setup of some sort utilizing local storage on the hosts, but it does the job for now.
At sixteen hosts that's not trivial. You could do something like a Scale HC3 at that size, but most solutions are not meant to scale up like that. Around the dozen server mark (more or less) a good SAN solution starts to be a pretty obvious choice just because it is so cost effective to consolidate to that degree. 3PAR is one of the three best names in the SAN game, IMHO, and I'd likely stick with that unless you are really looking to redesign heavily. Now, two 3PARs that are synced, yeah, that would be the way to go. But, budgets.
Good to know it's not a completely crazy setup. 
I really have no complaints about the 3PAR setup we have. Support is good. I have an InformOS upgrade scheduled for Thursday. The upgrade will give us data deduplication which I'm excited to try.
I have to say it's been a decent setup for what it is. I would prefer a vSAN setup of some sort utilizing local storage on the hosts, but it does the job for now.
@Danp said in XenServer 6.5 Troubleshoot HBA SR Disk Space:
@dafyre said:
Can you not live migrate the systems from the host with the issue to another host, and then reboot it?
Not sure that would work in this case.
@anthonyh said :
This is a 16 host pool... How do I know which host is causing the locks?
So, you have 16 XS hosts connected to a network storage array?
Well, I have 16 hosts connected to a 3PAR FibreChannel SAN. So more-or-less yes.
@dafyre said in XenServer 6.5 Troubleshoot HBA SR Disk Space:
@anthonyh said in XenServer 6.5 Troubleshoot HBA SR Disk Space:
@DustinB3403 said in XenServer 6.5 Troubleshoot HBA SR Disk Space:
I had the same thing happen with my home lab (granted single host) but what happened was I was out of space on the array for the hypervisor, from snapshotting and VM space (also non-thin provisioned).
And was using the total array, even after removing snapshots. I checked with the XS forums, they said to reboot the hypervisor.
insert expletive here
So, the reason why this is a problem is because I cannot take snapshots of said VM. And because I cannot take snapshots, I cannot (easily) back it up.
I wonder if I can cycle through the hosts and reboot them one at a time...if that would work.
Or, I can take the shortcut and make the SR bigger...but then that's just wasted disk space.
Hmmm...
Can you not live migrate the systems from the host with the issue to another host, and then reboot it?
How do I know which host is causing the locks?
