@bigbear said in Bookkeeping Showdown: Wave vs Xero:

Anyone done this yet?

No, but I would really like to hear how it goes for you.

@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:

How do you plan to get around pressing the source buttons since you're planning on having more than one source?

I meant on the TV. So if the devices you want to use are on, you just press the button/turn the selector on the receiver and the audio matches the video. Right now the audio runs to the receiver and the video goes to the TV since my receiver doesn't have HDMI inputs and can't switch the video.

The room is 11'x17' with the TV on the short wall. I have some Kenwood speakers and a Sony receiver that is 20 years old. The system sounds ok. I was going to just replace the receiver with something that has HDMI inputs instead of the RCA inputs my existing receiver has, then your post made me think there might be something else I should consider.

My main thing is something that any one can just turn on and use without having to press source buttons, etc. I had actually solved that problem years ago with a Logitech Harmony remote, but then the dog got ahold of it...

@scottalanmiller said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:

So the goal isn't lofty, in at least 50% of cases, it is also practical.

Can you give us a parts list of what you would recommend? I was thinking about replacing my receiver with something that has HDMI inputs so I can switch between the DVD player and the kids gaming consoles.

I usually get a ticket about attaching invoices in QuickBooks. To troubleshoot, I drop back to Word and try to "send as Attachment". If that fails with the same error, I know that the Office install has become corrupt and a reinstall of Office fixes it. I'm not sure what causes it. I have one network where I have three identical machines running the same version of Office, etc, same WSUS server and it doesn't happen to all at the same time, so I have ruled out a bad update from Microsoft.

@Spiral As a CPA, is there a package that you have used that is not hard to switch to if you're an Accountant that only has experience with QuickBooks?

Anyone have any experience with MobileIron or others?

I'm on Vultr as well. It's working well for me.

@bigbear The corp LAN knows nothing of the private network. The private network uses its own internet and just goes to the corp LAN for access to the one server.

@travisdh1 said in EdgeRouter routing:

Gotta love finding equipment you didn't know was on-site...

I once found a 48 port switch bolted to the top of a partition wall up above a ceiling. If I can find a picture, I'll start a new thread.

As a consultant, it's getting harder and harder to surprise me and I don't really trust what users say about how they think things work anymore.

The tracert is interesting. The server that I thought was across a site to site VPN is more likely in the building due to the ping times:

Tracing route to 10.66.1.100 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  10.1.62.1
  2     1 ms     2 ms     1 ms  192.168.62.1
  3     2 ms     2 ms     1 ms  192.168.180.2
  4     2 ms     2 ms     1 ms  10.66.1.100

Trace complete.

Got it.

Added a static route of 10.66.1.0/24 192.168.62.1 eth3 and life is good.

creating a masq for eth3 automatically created a static route for 192.168.62.0/24, and then I added a couple of more routes, but something isn't right because my ping from the windows box looks like this:

Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=61
Request timed out.
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.
Reply from 10.66.1.100: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=61
Reply from 10.1.62.1: Destination host unreachable.

@mike-davis said in EdgeRouter routing:

Since 10.1.62.x is NATed behind the ER how would the other networks know about it?
Wouldn't they only need to get back to 192.168.62.20 ?

I think that partially answers my question. I'm not NATing eth3 yet....

@dashrender

Since 10.1.62.x is NATed behind the ER how would the other networks know about it?
Wouldn't they only need to get back to 192.168.62.20 ?

@dashrender said in EdgeRouter routing:

From your diagram, it's likely that server 10.66.1.100 has no idea how to get back to 10.1.62.20. You need to give it a route to Corp Cisco router for network/node 10.1.62.20 and the corp cisco router needs a route also to network/node 10.1.62.20.

When the laptop is plugged in where the ER is, it has no problem connecting.

@jaredbusch said in EdgeRouter routing:

Unless this is legally an entire separate entity, corporate SHOULD be doing that.

It's a Dr has her own practice, but consults for them. Other specialists in the building are owned by corporate, so when it came to connectivity, they just plugged her in to their LAN. It made it easy to connect to their server, but other things are a real pain because they don't own her equipment etc.

@dashrender said in EdgeRouter routing:

Do you not have an option for setting up a VPN connection to this 10.66.1.100 device from within the new network?

Probably could, but the way it was Corp was connecting in and messing with their machines so they don't want to have a wide open connection.

Basically I plugged the Edge router in where the computer was plugged in and statically assigned the IP address to Eth3 on the ER. The cisco router that Corp supplied must have a site to site VPN running since 10.66.1.100 is a private address.

This is what I have now: