@scottalanmiller said in Download OneNote Files from Sharepoint:

We have a large number of legacy OneNote files storage in Sharepoint via Office 365. When we first started using OneNote, the files were stored as normal files and we could upload them, download them, etc. They were decently practical. Now, Sharepoint and OneNote both block any attempts at working with local files and there seems to be no mechanism for downloading the actual OneNote files to store them somewhere else.

Has anyone else had any luck with this? We just want to take a copy of our own MS Office files and store there somewhere as an archive.

How come you want to download them? I just choose Open with OneNote in SharePoint, then I can work with it offline as needed. It syncs when I jump back online so others can see changes.

@dbeato said in SPF issues:

@bbigford said in SPF issues:

This one is stumping me. I resolved another engineer's issue, but I don't see why there was an issue to begin with. Here are some high points:

• On-premises Exchange server.
• Another provider needed to be added to SPF, as they are a service that sends on behalf of the client's domain.
• v=spf1 mx a include:exchange.ourdomain.com include:mail.sendingproviderdomain.com ~all
• Above SPF record was present when issue was happening.
• I looked up their spf record, which was v=spf1 ip4..... many IPs.
• PTR for exchange.ourdomain.com resolves, using MXToolbox.
• Forward lookup is fine as well.
• Removed mx a include:exchange.ourdomain.com and added ip4:<OurPublicIP>
• v=spf1 ip4:<OurPublicIP> include:mail.sendingproviderdomain.com ~all

What I don't get is why the first SPF doesn't check out. There is a PTR record in GoDaddy, and a host record pointing at the correct IP. SPF should read "any MX records, and IPs, for exchange.ourdomain.com are allowed to send; including a provider, and for spoofing there will be a soft fail".

Where am I wrong?

SPF does not neck the mx records of the includes, it checks only the A and MX records of the domain with the SPF record. You should add the SPF record of the exchange.ourdomain.com Email Servers (Namely Office 365, G-Suite or any other email vendor).

On-prem Exchnage. I also saw a vendor that has theirs written as mx:<email.domain.com>... I've saw some written with a:<hostname> but not mx: ... Didn't know that was a thing.

So how would you write an spf record for our instance to have validation? It works now with the public IP, but I can't figure out why the FQDN doesn't work.

This one is stumping me. I resolved another engineer's issue, but I don't see why there was an issue to begin with. Here are some high points:

• On-premises Exchange server.
• Another provider needed to be added to SPF, as they are a service that sends on behalf of the client's domain.
• v=spf1 mx a include:exchange.ourdomain.com include:mail.sendingproviderdomain.com ~all
• Above SPF record was present when issue was happening.
• I looked up their spf record, which was v=spf1 ip4..... many IPs.
• PTR for exchange.ourdomain.com resolves, using MXToolbox.
• Forward lookup is fine as well.
• Removed mx a include:exchange.ourdomain.com and added ip4:<OurPublicIP>
• v=spf1 ip4:<OurPublicIP> include:mail.sendingproviderdomain.com ~all

What I don't get is why the first SPF doesn't check out. There is a PTR record in GoDaddy, and a host record pointing at the correct IP. SPF should read "any MX records, and IPs, for exchange.ourdomain.com are allowed to send; including a provider, and for spoofing there will be a soft fail".

Where am I wrong?

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@penguinwrangler said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

6'5" and was 215 at Thanksgiving. After TG dinner I said I was going on a diet to get back down to the 185 I'm comfortable with. I got down to 175 by New Years. Just takes proper planning of meals to automate your groove; along with exercise, and no cheating.

6'5" tall and you are complaining about being 215? You must have a small build for someone that tall. I was gifted with a linebacker type of build. I am 6'4" tall and I was 313 lbs. Most people tell me, you couldn't be that heavy, but I was. I have a long tall torso so hiding my true weight was easy, relatively normal length legs, 32" inseam on my pants.

Hmm... yeah i read that again. 6'5" wanting to get down to 175 lbs? That's less than I am usualy, and I'm 5'10"ish. I thought I was pretty skinny... 6'5" and 215 seems like it'd be in the upper end of the healthy range... without looking at any charts off the top of my head.

230 is a good target weight, but I just never had any success actually putting on some solid muscle, so I eventually gave up on all the weight gaining programs and weight lifting.

Muscle building is a very slow process for everyone.... after the newbie gains anyway. If you are new or coming back to weight lifting and you stick to an intense workout routine for 4 or so months (as in great sleep, great eating, great workouts), you will see very noticeable muscle gains. But after the initial gains, you can't really expect to gain more than a kilo or two of solid muscle weight PER YEAR. It's a very slow process, and is something best done for the health benefits rather than trying to look big asap.

The people you see walking around with big muscles have been doing it for years consistently, or have done (or are doing) steroids. Plain and simple. In about 10 years of consistent muscle workouts, as in 3-4 times a week, an hour each time, no more than a week's rest every couple months.

For women it's a bit different. Many DON'T lift weights for fear of getting too much muscle. This is a myth. Women simply lack the testosterone required to "bulk up and look like a man" if you know what I mean. It's literally impossible (it's simple science), and those women who have, were taking steroids.

A good weight lifting routine is always better than cardio. It burns more calories, promotes better health, and does a lot more for your body... such as shapign and toning

This part I don't agree with. Strong (not large, but strong; they are not the same) arm/leg/chest/back muscles can spare me from a heart attack? Cardio and core strength promotes hip dyplasia deterrence, strong back muscles, blood flow, and heart health. I can't agree that lifting weights is better than cardio for a human body long term life, but I would agree that it has benefits for other reasons.

This is the myth, and what I started out thinking as well. I'll link the science and studies tomorrow when I have time. Long story short, that there is a right way to lift, and doing so does for you everything you think straight cardio does.

Extreme heavy lifters, with proper breathing exercises, can run 12 miles on an average day? Outside of the weight they carry, their breathing is mild at the end of a 12 mile run with no slow down or break on mild inclind/decline at a relative pace?

This is, of course, not focusing on the impact on their knees/back based on their body composition, and what that might look like long term. Just strictly focusing on cardio vs. lifting and how those might intertwine.

Extremes on either side are terrible... why bring those into the mix?

I was using extreme examples because how I interpreted the content was "weight lifting can accommodate long distance running because heavy lifting can have certain cardio, vascular, and pulmonology benefits that can displace distance running or otherwise long term cardio activity". I was making an assumption that you were on a single side of weight lifting being able to displace a mix of running/hiking/etc.

That is my fault for misinterpreting and not asking many more questions.

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@penguinwrangler said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

6'5" and was 215 at Thanksgiving. After TG dinner I said I was going on a diet to get back down to the 185 I'm comfortable with. I got down to 175 by New Years. Just takes proper planning of meals to automate your groove; along with exercise, and no cheating.

6'5" tall and you are complaining about being 215? You must have a small build for someone that tall. I was gifted with a linebacker type of build. I am 6'4" tall and I was 313 lbs. Most people tell me, you couldn't be that heavy, but I was. I have a long tall torso so hiding my true weight was easy, relatively normal length legs, 32" inseam on my pants.

Hmm... yeah i read that again. 6'5" wanting to get down to 175 lbs? That's less than I am usualy, and I'm 5'10"ish. I thought I was pretty skinny... 6'5" and 215 seems like it'd be in the upper end of the healthy range... without looking at any charts off the top of my head.

230 is a good target weight, but I just never had any success actually putting on some solid muscle, so I eventually gave up on all the weight gaining programs and weight lifting.

Muscle building is a very slow process for everyone.... after the newbie gains anyway. If you are new or coming back to weight lifting and you stick to an intense workout routine for 4 or so months (as in great sleep, great eating, great workouts), you will see very noticeable muscle gains. But after the initial gains, you can't really expect to gain more than a kilo or two of solid muscle weight PER YEAR. It's a very slow process, and is something best done for the health benefits rather than trying to look big asap.

The people you see walking around with big muscles have been doing it for years consistently, or have done (or are doing) steroids. Plain and simple. In about 10 years of consistent muscle workouts, as in 3-4 times a week, an hour each time, no more than a week's rest every couple months.

For women it's a bit different. Many DON'T lift weights for fear of getting too much muscle. This is a myth. Women simply lack the testosterone required to "bulk up and look like a man" if you know what I mean. It's literally impossible (it's simple science), and those women who have, were taking steroids.

A good weight lifting routine is always better than cardio. It burns more calories, promotes better health, and does a lot more for your body... such as shapign and toning

This part I don't agree with. Strong (not large, but strong; they are not the same) arm/leg/chest/back muscles can spare me from a heart attack? Cardio and core strength promotes hip dyplasia deterrence, strong back muscles, blood flow, and heart health. I can't agree that lifting weights is better than cardio for a human body long term life, but I would agree that it has benefits for other reasons.

This is the myth, and what I started out thinking as well. I'll link the science and studies tomorrow when I have time. Long story short, that there is a right way to lift, and doing so does for you everything you think straight cardio does.

Extreme heavy lifters, with proper breathing exercises, can run 12 miles on an average day? Outside of the weight they carry, their breathing is mild at the end of a 12 mile run with no slow down or break on mild inclind/decline at a relative pace?

This is, of course, not focusing on the impact on their knees/back based on their body composition, and what that might look like long term. Just strictly focusing on cardio vs. lifting and how those might intertwine.

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

But they are doing their own hosting in house....

No hosting provider can handle that.

They could, AWS/Azure/GCP, but the client would be paying insane amounts for it until they finally level off and can host it in-house while maintaining compliance (although, wherever "in house" is, that compliance might be offloaded to a data center who has part in that literature and effort... hard fork before I get off topic). I'd be interested to see who they had hosting their stuff at the peak before they went in-house (if they were ever external).

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

I'm curious to see what their customer DB uses, and what they use for financial processing and front end.

They use MySQL.

They're modern enough that they scoff at anything but Google Mail and use MySQL for their customer DB? I don't get it... Why not PostgreSQL, or MariaDB?

They specifically moved from PostgreSQL to MySQL. They started on PostgreSQL and switched. Presumably they went with MySQL over MariaDB because they want Oracle commercial support.

How can you validate that?

Performance? Support costs.

Operations. Are you assuming what they are using, or you have inside information and know what they switched from, and why?

I guess the question is, are you speculating or do you actually know?

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

I'm curious to see what their customer DB uses, and what they use for financial processing and front end.

They use MySQL.

They're modern enough that they scoff at anything but Google Mail and use MySQL for their customer DB? I don't get it... Why not PostgreSQL, or MariaDB?

They specifically moved from PostgreSQL to MySQL. They started on PostgreSQL and switched. Presumably they went with MySQL over MariaDB because they want Oracle commercial support.

How can you validate that?

Performance? Support costs.

Operations. Are you assuming what they are using, or you have inside information and know what they switched from, and why?

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

I'm curious to see what their customer DB uses, and what they use for financial processing and front end.

They use MySQL.

They're modern enough that they scoff at anything but Google Mail and use MySQL for their customer DB? I don't get it... Why not PostgreSQL, or MariaDB?

They specifically moved from PostgreSQL to MySQL. They started on PostgreSQL and switched. Presumably they went with MySQL over MariaDB because they want Oracle commercial support.

How can you validate that?

@scottalanmiller said in Uber public space:

@bbigford said in Uber public space:

I'm curious to see what their customer DB uses, and what they use for financial processing and front end.

They use MySQL.

They're modern enough that they scoff at anything but Google Mail and use MySQL for their customer DB? I don't get it... Why not PostgreSQL, or MariaDB?

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@penguinwrangler said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

6'5" and was 215 at Thanksgiving. After TG dinner I said I was going on a diet to get back down to the 185 I'm comfortable with. I got down to 175 by New Years. Just takes proper planning of meals to automate your groove; along with exercise, and no cheating.

6'5" tall and you are complaining about being 215? You must have a small build for someone that tall. I was gifted with a linebacker type of build. I am 6'4" tall and I was 313 lbs. Most people tell me, you couldn't be that heavy, but I was. I have a long tall torso so hiding my true weight was easy, relatively normal length legs, 32" inseam on my pants.

Hmm... yeah i read that again. 6'5" wanting to get down to 175 lbs? That's less than I am usualy, and I'm 5'10"ish. I thought I was pretty skinny... 6'5" and 215 seems like it'd be in the upper end of the healthy range... without looking at any charts off the top of my head.

230 is a good target weight, but I just never had any success actually putting on some solid muscle, so I eventually gave up on all the weight gaining programs and weight lifting.

Muscle building is a very slow process for everyone.... after the newbie gains anyway. If you are new or coming back to weight lifting and you stick to an intense workout routine for 4 or so months (as in great sleep, great eating, great workouts), you will see very noticeable muscle gains. But after the initial gains, you can't really expect to gain more than a kilo or two of solid muscle weight PER YEAR. It's a very slow process, and is something best done for the health benefits rather than trying to look big asap.

The people you see walking around with big muscles have been doing it for years consistently, or have done (or are doing) steroids. Plain and simple. In about 10 years of consistent muscle workouts, as in 3-4 times a week, an hour each time, no more than a week's rest every couple months.

For women it's a bit different. Many DON'T lift weights for fear of getting too much muscle. This is a myth. Women simply lack the testosterone required to "bulk up and look like a man" if you know what I mean. It's literally impossible (it's simple science), and those women who have, were taking steroids.

A good weight lifting routine is always better than cardio. It burns more calories, promotes better health, and does a lot more for your body... such as shapign and toning

This part I don't agree with. Strong (not large, but strong; they are not the same) arm/leg/chest/back muscles can spare me from a heart attack? Cardio and core strength promotes hip dyplasia deterrence, strong back muscles, blood flow, and heart health. I can't agree that lifting weights is better than cardio for a human body long term life, but I would agree that it has benefits for other reasons.

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@penguinwrangler said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

6'5" and was 215 at Thanksgiving. After TG dinner I said I was going on a diet to get back down to the 185 I'm comfortable with. I got down to 175 by New Years. Just takes proper planning of meals to automate your groove; along with exercise, and no cheating.

6'5" tall and you are complaining about being 215? You must have a small build for someone that tall. I was gifted with a linebacker type of build. I am 6'4" tall and I was 313 lbs. Most people tell me, you couldn't be that heavy, but I was. I have a long tall torso so hiding my true weight was easy, relatively normal length legs, 32" inseam on my pants.

Hmm... yeah i read that again. 6'5" wanting to get down to 175 lbs? That's less than I am usualy, and I'm 5'10"ish. I thought I was pretty skinny... 6'5" and 215 seems like it'd be in the upper end of the healthy range... without looking at any charts off the top of my head.

230 is a good target weight, but I just never had any success actually putting on some solid muscle, so I eventually gave up on all the weight gaining programs and weight lifting.

Muscle building is a very slow process for everyone.... after the newbie gains anyway. If you are new or coming back to weight lifting and you stick to an intense workout routine for 4 or so months (as in great sleep, great eating, great workouts), you will see very noticeable muscle gains. But after the initial gains, you can't really expect to gain more than a kilo or two of solid muscle weight PER YEAR. It's a very slow process, and is something best done for the health benefits rather than trying to look big asap.

The people you see walking around with big muscles have been doing it for years consistently, or have done (or are doing) steroids. Plain and simple. In about 10 years of consistent muscle workouts, as in 3-4 times a week, an hour each time, no more than a week's rest every couple months.

For women it's a bit different. Many DON'T lift weights for fear of getting too much muscle. This is a myth. Women simply lack the testosterone required to "bulk up and look like a man" if you know what I mean. It's literally impossible (it's simple science), and those women who have, were taking steroids.

A good weight lifting routine is always better than cardio. It burns more calories, promotes better health, and does a lot more for your body... such as shapign and toning, as well as cardiovascular benefits.... where cardio/running may only hurt you in the long run (like damages your knees... doesn't promote muscle growth or keep as much bone density) when compared to weight lifting.

I tried weight gain while I was training for the US Navy, before I blew out my knee in a swim and they didn't want me going in after that. It was over a year of training between highschool and delayed-entry that got me toned, but no significant weight.

But I do comprehend what you are saying with long term and agree that there is a tipping point. There are very many people who are tall and slender, continue to work at weight gain, and it seems that they explode almost overnight within a month or so with gains. Maybe my body couldn't hold out long enough for the gains, or I just didn't put in enough.

Had been wondering who Uber was using for email, DNS, hosting, etc. Email is G-Suite, DNS is UltraDNS, and hosting is Uber Technologies. So, assuming they are hosting in-house after some very light digging.

Their company worth is around $6.5B and revenue is down $2.5B. When you're in the billions, in the millions, in the hundreds of thousands, where do you look for some of those services? I don't consider their DNS, hosting, and email in the same table discussion as who they've gone with for those services.

Let's get controversial. I don't own a multi-billion dollar company so my honest opinion is inherently wrong, because what I think is inherently incorrect. But they are doing their own hosting in house, and everything else is with appears to be fairly (subjective) standard providers. Nothing is premium here. UltraDNS for DNS and Google for email are great when you're tiny to intermediate, education, or just looking to save money. As someone who has supported both on a scale with thousands of users, that is my personal opinion. Self-hosting makes sense when you either have no budget or are massive, but the in between doesn't make sense to me for security purposes.

I think there is a point where you go with those services because you're small and waiting to scale, and where they are at now and some people might think "how have you never migrated?" I'm curious to see what their customer DB uses, and what they use for financial processing and front end.

Flame on, please. I'd like to hear some different perspectives. I likely won't provide any input for at least a few days so that I don't stifle conversation.

@tim_g said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@penguinwrangler said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

6'5" and was 215 at Thanksgiving. After TG dinner I said I was going on a diet to get back down to the 185 I'm comfortable with. I got down to 175 by New Years. Just takes proper planning of meals to automate your groove; along with exercise, and no cheating.

6'5" tall and you are complaining about being 215? You must have a small build for someone that tall. I was gifted with a linebacker type of build. I am 6'4" tall and I was 313 lbs. Most people tell me, you couldn't be that heavy, but I was. I have a long tall torso so hiding my true weight was easy, relatively normal length legs, 32" inseam on my pants.

Hmm... yeah i read that again. 6'5" wanting to get down to 175 lbs? That's less than I am usualy, and I'm 5'10"ish. I thought I was pretty skinny... 6'5" and 215 seems like it'd be in the upper end of the healthy range... without looking at any charts off the top of my head.

230 is a good target weight, but I just never had any success actually putting on some solid muscle, so I eventually gave up on all the weight gaining programs and weight lifting.

@penguinwrangler said in Fitness and Weightloss:

@bbigford said in Fitness and Weightloss:

6'5" and was 215 at Thanksgiving. After TG dinner I said I was going on a diet to get back down to the 185 I'm comfortable with. I got down to 175 by New Years. Just takes proper planning of meals to automate your groove; along with exercise, and no cheating.

6'5" tall and you are complaining about being 215? You must have a small build for someone that tall. I was gifted with a linebacker type of build. I am 6'4" tall and I was 313 lbs. Most people tell me, you couldn't be that heavy, but I was. I have a long tall torso so hiding my true weight was easy, relatively normal length legs, 32" inseam on my pants.

I do have a slender build.

Happy birthday dude!

@scottalanmiller said in Audits, and more audits:

@bbigford said in Audits, and more audits:

@scottalanmiller said in Audits, and more audits:

@bbigford said in Audits, and more audits:

@scottalanmiller said in Audits, and more audits:

We specifically proposed "audit reductions" in some system changes that we proposed for a client just last week.

Can you clarify on how you plan on reducing audits?

In our case, removing all Windows products so that MS can't call for an audit.

How many random Microsoft audits have you had so far in your career? Random as in not triggered by a disgruntled employee calling something in (heard of that happening many times), or anything else that forces a trigger.

My personally, believe it or not, zero. But I have so little Windows in my environments and/or are in environments with licenses that keep audits from happening.

Sorry, I don't mean you personally (as in your personal assets, businesses you directly own or co-own, etc). I mean you as in the consultant for businesses you have no investment in beyond what they are paying you as a consultant. Basically, Company X doesn't have internal IT or development, and they hire you or the company you're employed by and consulting/designing/implementing for. Do any of those clients require PCI/SOC2/HIPAA/CIPA compliance? If so, I'd definitely like to fork this thread and cover some of that because those compliance standards are not really up to me (PCI, HIPAA, and SOC2 auditors reach out annually), so I'd be interested in how you're handling beyond annual (legally). I prefer SOC2 because SOX is a joke. Not sure if you are currently supporting SOC2 since I'm not entirely sure how NTG is handling certain client data as either a fully managed provider, strictly hosting solution, or anything else specifically. Very interested in more aspects though.

@scottalanmiller said in Audits, and more audits:

@bbigford said in Audits, and more audits:

@scottalanmiller said in Audits, and more audits:

We specifically proposed "audit reductions" in some system changes that we proposed for a client just last week.

Can you clarify on how you plan on reducing audits?

In our case, removing all Windows products so that MS can't call for an audit.

How many random Microsoft audits have you had so far in your career? Random as in not triggered by a disgruntled employee calling something in (heard of that happening many times), or anything else that forces a trigger.

@scottalanmiller said in Audits, and more audits:

@bbigford said in Audits, and more audits:

@scottalanmiller said in Audits, and more audits:

We specifically proposed "audit reductions" in some system changes that we proposed for a client just last week.

Can you clarify on how you plan on reducing audits?

In our case, removing all Windows products so that MS can't call for an audit.

Do you not have to do any other audits with clients such as CIPA/HIPAA/PCI/SOC2? If not, that'd make it super easy if you just annually updated documentation or on-the-fly with new infrastructure changes (if standards changed so much that documented needed updating).

@scottalanmiller said in Audits, and more audits:

We specifically proposed "audit reductions" in some system changes that we proposed for a client just last week.

Can you clarify on how you plan on reducing audits? PCI and HIPAA both require audits at very specific times of the year (semi-annually preferred, annual at minimum). CIPA is a bit different.

When I've proposed reductions, I've done strictly annual. If systems absolutely don't change, I suppose you might be able to do every other year. Every 3 years would be too much.

I've moved to having templates available for clients with various tiers. They have the option of "purchasing" the template, which is updated annually. Purchasing the template cuts down significantly vs. writing one from scratch. Essentially if we do a dozen audits, and I write one template that can cover every single one of our clients, it's worth it because I only have to write a few pages every year with modifications, rather than writing many.

Dealing with hosting providers is a mix. Some of them have material available, others are painfully lacking and takes months to obtain, in pieces that have to be compiled.

One of the things I hate most in this life, are audits.