Having worked in the public sector, government, private single company, and now going on my third MSP; mainly consulting, building out infrastructure, and migrating services to cloud based environments (SaaS, PaaS, IaaS depending on the need). I've gotten the opportunity to see the market shift over the years, the last 2 being very interesting.

We have been doing a massive amount of migrations to the cloud for security, uptime, and cost (subjective to the use case of course). It's been done for healthcare, eCommerce, legal systems, public school districts, etc.

Many infrastructure skills are being deprecated in this process. High level Exchange engineering is something I'm actually a little sad to see go; I legitimately enjoy building out highly available Exchange environments, SharePoint, etc.

As the market shifts in the next 5-8 years, it's becoming very apparent that there are going to be a handful of different positions that one would need to bet on as the nuts and bolts of the infrastructure become mystified if you migrate your clients to the cloud:

• Development - Coders will still be in very high demand.Cyber Security - Still going to be in very high demand.Networking - I can't see this going away on-premises. If anything, things will get more complex with NIDS/NIPS, UTM capabilities, etc. Possibly offloading to hosted services all together for filtering/inspection/etc.

• DevOps - Bridging the gap between dev and infrastructure (whether migrating or not, wherever that infrastructure might be).

• Solutions architect - It's not really on the infrastructure side of things necessarily, even working with IaaS. It's more about working with products and business workflows really.

• Cloud engineer/automation - Working for a major provider, whether it is in cloud computing (Azure, AWS, GCC, etc), VPS (Vultr, Linode, Digital Ocean, etc), or cloud services (Dropbox, etc).

It's not like looking into a crystal ball, it's like looking into a black hole if you're a senior infrastructure engineer like me who doesn't like coding (not the same as scripting).

What are you putting your time and efforts into for the coming years?

@brrabill said in Mapping OneDrive Business to a drive letter:

@bbigford said in Mapping OneDrive Business to a drive letter:

@scottalanmiller said in Mapping OneDrive Business to a drive letter:

@momurda said in Mapping OneDrive Business to a drive letter:

What is the point of OneDrive if you cant mount it as a drive letter easily?
Someone please explain. It seems absoultely horrible.

Why woudl you want it as a drive letter? The drive letter is an old holdover that isn't very good. You can mount OneDrive as a folder which is better most of the time.

Assuming that OneDrive syncing actually works, which generally it is pretty poor.

I find OneDrive itself (the consumer one) works great.

ODfB, though ... LOOKOUT!

Hah, yeah that's the one I was speaking toward. Assumed that is what is being brought up here since it's for a business. I could be wrong though.

But yeah, ODfB... wow. I hear it's a little better but I've completely written it off as of late.

@wls-itguy said in VMWare vSphere 6.5 loses licensing:

@bbigford said in VMWare vSphere 6.5 loses licensing:

@wls-itguy said in VMWare vSphere 6.5 loses licensing:

Anyone else have this happen recently? I got Veeam backup failure notifications last night and this morning saying that the servers being backed up were disconnected. I connected to vCenter and Sho'Nuff two of my hosts were disconnected. When I tried to reconnect it said I didn't have licensing. It took a bit but I finally got them reconnected and relicensed.

Haven't provided enough information, but here's why ours get relicensed often...

If you're a VMware partner, you get access to their Enterprise Plus licensing. That's very expensive licensing that they just hand over. But it also means that we have to go through quarterly and reapply licensing; VMware sends it to us, and we replace it.

Can you provide some more information about your licensing level, etc?

Essentials Plus.

Does the license actually disappear, or does it just show that it is not applied to any hosts but the license is still in the console?

@scottalanmiller said in Mapping OneDrive Business to a drive letter:

@momurda said in Mapping OneDrive Business to a drive letter:

What is the point of OneDrive if you cant mount it as a drive letter easily?
Someone please explain. It seems absoultely horrible.

Why woudl you want it as a drive letter? The drive letter is an old holdover that isn't very good. You can mount OneDrive as a folder which is better most of the time.

Assuming that OneDrive syncing actually works, which generally it is pretty poor.

@wls-itguy said in VMWare vSphere 6.5 loses licensing:

Anyone else have this happen recently? I got Veeam backup failure notifications last night and this morning saying that the servers being backed up were disconnected. I connected to vCenter and Sho'Nuff two of my hosts were disconnected. When I tried to reconnect it said I didn't have licensing. It took a bit but I finally got them reconnected and relicensed.

Haven't provided enough information, but here's why ours get relicensed often...

If you're a VMware partner, you get access to their Enterprise Plus licensing. That's very expensive licensing that they just hand over. But it also means that we have to go through quarterly and reapply licensing; VMware sends it to us, and we replace it.

Can you provide some more information about your licensing level, etc?

@nerdydad said in Mapping OneDrive Business to a drive letter:

@coliver said in Mapping OneDrive Business to a drive letter:

This is the script I am using. It works fairly well.

http://www.lieben.nu/liebensraum/onedrivemapper/

Oh my gosh, that script is HUGE. I'm not a software developer, but I'll see if I can read through it and put it to practice.

Thanks,

If you go heads down you might be able to do it by Christmas.

@momurda said in How long to keep people's AD/Exchange accounts:

Yes i have a process i want to follow too but cant.
3 years after people have not worked here, they still have an email and i think it is stupid AF.

Indeed, it is stupid af. Easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission.

@dashrender said in Windows Admin Center:

@bbigford said in Windows Admin Center:

It was a messy setup and doesn't work with most browsers. I started laughing when I got the cert prompt.

Why, you would expect a self signed unless you replace it.

Sorry, not that I wasn't expecting it since it is self-signed. Just after having it not work with anything but Edge, it was just one more thing to get through and I was nearly done at that point. But I couldn't get it working with Edge very quickly to try it out (got more errors) so I eventually just uninstalled it.

I have a pretty standard process:

• Employee is terminated.
• AD account disabled.
• AD account moved to 'Disabled Users' OU.
• AD password changed.
• Membership for all groups removed.
• Mailbox converted to shared mailbox for any mailbox needing to be actively monitored (frees up a license).
• Email forwarding setup if needed in the interim.
• Mailbox archived to PST and stored on a file server when it is no longer actively monitored.
• Mailbox disabled (automatically purged after 30 days).
• AD account removed after 30 days.

It was a messy setup and doesn't work with most browsers. I started laughing when I got the cert prompt.

@jaredbusch said in security cameras using coax?:

@bbigford said in security cameras using coax?:

I wouldn't use coax anymore, even if the wiring is in place.

Replacing wire is expensive (in labor hours).

I would use something like this first.
https://www.amazon.com/Dualcomm-Ethernet-over-Adapters-DECA-100/dp/B009AGCLVG

Depends on how much wire needs to be run since 'expensive' is subjective. But I get what you're saying; it's more expensive than reusing the existing wire and just using an adapter.

I wouldn't use coax anymore, even if the wiring is in place.

Happy birthday @JaredBusch !

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

Ended up just going with BackBlaze B2 for the cost.

And there is Wasabi.

I do like that company for many reasons other than cost. But what throws me off is the method to connect the appliance is to use AWS S3. Any idea why that is?

That's not what it says at all. You are seeing the S3 API being chosen and thinking of Amazon's S3 service. Wasabi is just S3 compatible, that's all. It doesn't require a special API like other services.

The logo is what is throwing me off. I'm assuming the S3 API was created by Amazon, but then they are just allowing other companies to use it?

From what I've read about S3, it isn't proprietary; which makes me think Amazon doesn't have any kind of patent on the tech...

S3 is a service. A patent isn't possible on a service. That's not how patents works. An API is an interface and can't be patented either. That would be like patenting a language.

S3 the product is totally proprietary. S3 the API must be public or it is useless.

Got it. Thanks for clarifying. The 3 block logo was throwing me off as I thought it would be somehow using specific stuff for AWS since that has appeared to be their branding/logo; obviously it isn't an issue or Wasabi would have legal issues to deal with.

Where are you seeing that? I'm poking around on Wasabi's site and don't see it used.

Sorry, on the Synology Cloud Sync tool.

Right, that's Synology using it, not Wasabi. The tool is for "connecting to S3". It's definitely Amazon S3's logo. Why would Synology using it in any way cause legal trouble for Wasabi who didn't use it?

It wouldn't. I misspoke in that regard now that I am thinking about it more.

I dislike when they use logos like that. Because you can never tell if they mean it is integrated with the service, like the logo implies, or if it just uses a certain API that they are incorrectly associating.

I fully agree with that.

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

Ended up just going with BackBlaze B2 for the cost.

And there is Wasabi.

I do like that company for many reasons other than cost. But what throws me off is the method to connect the appliance is to use AWS S3. Any idea why that is?

That's not what it says at all. You are seeing the S3 API being chosen and thinking of Amazon's S3 service. Wasabi is just S3 compatible, that's all. It doesn't require a special API like other services.

The logo is what is throwing me off. I'm assuming the S3 API was created by Amazon, but then they are just allowing other companies to use it?

From what I've read about S3, it isn't proprietary; which makes me think Amazon doesn't have any kind of patent on the tech...

S3 is a service. A patent isn't possible on a service. That's not how patents works. An API is an interface and can't be patented either. That would be like patenting a language.

S3 the product is totally proprietary. S3 the API must be public or it is useless.

Got it. Thanks for clarifying. The 3 block logo was throwing me off as I thought it would be somehow using specific stuff for AWS since that has appeared to be their branding/logo; obviously it isn't an issue or Wasabi would have legal issues to deal with.

Where are you seeing that? I'm poking around on Wasabi's site and don't see it used.

Sorry, on the Synology Cloud Sync tool.

Right, that's Synology using it, not Wasabi. The tool is for "connecting to S3". It's definitely Amazon S3's logo. Why would Synology using it in any way cause legal trouble for Wasabi who didn't use it?

It wouldn't. I misspoke in that regard now that I am thinking about it more.

Plus I'm hungover so I'm not firing on all cylinders today.

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

Ended up just going with BackBlaze B2 for the cost.

And there is Wasabi.

I do like that company for many reasons other than cost. But what throws me off is the method to connect the appliance is to use AWS S3. Any idea why that is?

That's not what it says at all. You are seeing the S3 API being chosen and thinking of Amazon's S3 service. Wasabi is just S3 compatible, that's all. It doesn't require a special API like other services.

The logo is what is throwing me off. I'm assuming the S3 API was created by Amazon, but then they are just allowing other companies to use it?

From what I've read about S3, it isn't proprietary; which makes me think Amazon doesn't have any kind of patent on the tech...

S3 is a service. A patent isn't possible on a service. That's not how patents works. An API is an interface and can't be patented either. That would be like patenting a language.

S3 the product is totally proprietary. S3 the API must be public or it is useless.

Got it. Thanks for clarifying. The 3 block logo was throwing me off as I thought it would be somehow using specific stuff for AWS since that has appeared to be their branding/logo; obviously it isn't an issue or Wasabi would have legal issues to deal with.

Where are you seeing that? I'm poking around on Wasabi's site and don't see it used.

Sorry, on the Synology Cloud Sync tool.

Right, that's Synology using it, not Wasabi. The tool is for "connecting to S3". It's definitely Amazon S3's logo. Why would Synology using it in any way cause legal trouble for Wasabi who didn't use it?

It wouldn't. I misspoke in that regard now that I am thinking about it more.

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

Ended up just going with BackBlaze B2 for the cost.

And there is Wasabi.

I do like that company for many reasons other than cost. But what throws me off is the method to connect the appliance is to use AWS S3. Any idea why that is?

That's not what it says at all. You are seeing the S3 API being chosen and thinking of Amazon's S3 service. Wasabi is just S3 compatible, that's all. It doesn't require a special API like other services.

The logo is what is throwing me off. I'm assuming the S3 API was created by Amazon, but then they are just allowing other companies to use it?

From what I've read about S3, it isn't proprietary; which makes me think Amazon doesn't have any kind of patent on the tech...

S3 is a service. A patent isn't possible on a service. That's not how patents works. An API is an interface and can't be patented either. That would be like patenting a language.

S3 the product is totally proprietary. S3 the API must be public or it is useless.

Got it. Thanks for clarifying. The 3 block logo was throwing me off as I thought it would be somehow using specific stuff for AWS since that has appeared to be their branding/logo; obviously it isn't an issue or Wasabi would have legal issues to deal with.

Where are you seeing that? I'm poking around on Wasabi's site and don't see it used.

Sorry, on the Synology Cloud Sync tool.

@dbeato said in Hyper-V Manager Sometimes Disconnects from Failed RPC Calls:

Are this Windows AD domain joined Hyperv servers? I see that issue when the DCs are offline or rebooting.

I've experienced similar when hosts are not on a domain and the VMs are. All kinds of WMI errors requiring PowerShell to resolve; management and connectivity between joined and non-joined.

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

@scottalanmiller said in Synology cloud backups:

@bbigford said in Synology cloud backups:

Ended up just going with BackBlaze B2 for the cost.

And there is Wasabi.

I do like that company for many reasons other than cost. But what throws me off is the method to connect the appliance is to use AWS S3. Any idea why that is?

That's not what it says at all. You are seeing the S3 API being chosen and thinking of Amazon's S3 service. Wasabi is just S3 compatible, that's all. It doesn't require a special API like other services.

The logo is what is throwing me off. I'm assuming the S3 API was created by Amazon, but then they are just allowing other companies to use it?

From what I've read about S3, it isn't proprietary; which makes me think Amazon doesn't have any kind of patent on the tech...

S3 is a service. A patent isn't possible on a service. That's not how patents works. An API is an interface and can't be patented either. That would be like patenting a language.

S3 the product is totally proprietary. S3 the API must be public or it is useless.

Got it. Thanks for clarifying. The 3 block logo was throwing me off as I thought it would be somehow using specific stuff for AWS since that has appeared to be their branding/logo; obviously it isn't an issue or Wasabi would have legal issues to deal with.

@jaredbusch said in Does any one have a EdgeRouter 4 online and can test L2TP:

Changed (well added a proposal) the DH group form 19 to 14 and boom it all works.

set vpn ipsec esp-group aciesp proposal 3 encryption aes256
set vpn ipsec esp-group aciesp proposal 3 hash sha256
set vpn ipsec ike-group aciesp proposal 3 dh-group 14
set vpn ipsec ike-group aciesp proposal 3 encryption aes256
set vpn ipsec ike-group aciesp proposal 3 hash sha256

Any insight on maybe why that worked? I've had issues with the default group on another manufacturer, but I wouldn't think 14 was default.