Best posts made by NashBrydges

Thanks for all the feedback. I'll be creating a few VMs for the staff to "play" with to see what flavor of Linux they like best. These suggestions will be very useful.

I'm looking for an appointment scheduling solution for the following scenario for a client. They have software that can only allow one user access at a time and need to schedule access for multiple users throughout the day.

• Admin will create a calendar
• users will then be able to schedule their system access based on availability
• must be self hosted
• must be web based front end (mobile apps not required)
• must have reminders for users as their scheduled time slot approaches (reminder emails won't work). Only way this would likely work is if the members remain logged in to the web page and the system pops up a reminder as their time approaches.
• should preferably allow for individuals to log into the system to schedule their time slot but will need to see system availability and scheduled times from other users (no edit access for other user scheduled appointments) so they can negotiate changes is necessary (that negotiation process does not need to live within the calendar)
• Google calendar and shared Office 365 calendars are not viable solutions (members will live across multiple teams and the calendar will contain some sensitive information so only self hosted solutions)

Wondering if anyone here has something similar they've used and can recommend. I've spent hours on Google and all options looked at so far don't really fit the need for one reason or another.

Closest I've seen is https://smartscheduling.com/ but not self hosted and didn't have web based reminders for logged in users. If you can imagine an appointment scheduling tool like that of a Dr's office but where reminders are sent to front desk staff and not patients.

@wrx7m said in Errors Building Guacamole Server on Fedora 28:

I have noticed that there are a quite a few threads on something not working properly on Fedora 28. I guess it is just that it seems to be the preferred OS and people are using it more than others.

Yeah there's a real love affair for Fedora here but in my case, when I couldn't get this running on Fedora and was able to get it working flawlessly on Ubuntu, guess what OS it's running on right now. Many guides for setting this up on Ubuntu out there.

Not sure if this fits your needs 100% but certainly works for my needs. I use uptimerobot.com. They have a free and paid version but I only needed the free version. If a site does not respond to pings, it sends an email to my ticketing software to open a ticket for me to investigate. It can do more than just verify ping as well such as look for content on the page and flag if found or not found...etc.

Of course, this only works if your sites are externally available.

@scottalanmiller said in Linux As File Server- Break Out From Other Thread:

@nashbrydges said in Linux As File Server- Break Out From Other Thread:

The only problem with this is, although I'm getting better with Linux and can manage most scenarios now, Hyper-V is the hypervisor I'm most comfortable with.

This is like saying that lighting a campfire with flint and stones is what you will do because you are used to it, when the lightswitch is already invented. Even being used to it, I think the light switch remains easier once you try it out

Lmao. That's not even a valid comparison. Using Hyper-V or KVM is going to provide an excellent hypervisor platform and while there may be some advantages of using one over the other, we aren't talking about a full on departure from what would be considered good business practice. While I learn about KVM as a hypervisor and continue to use Hyper-V in the meantime, I'm still using standard industry best practice tools. If something was completely against today's norms like running Windows Server with Hyper-V role instead of Hyper-V Server, then it's fair to say that's not the right approach.

Let's not forget that there is huge value in using something you know well over something you don't, especially when it is still best practice.

@emad-r said in Linux As File Server- Break Out From Other Thread:

I just dont get why File Server old way of thinking is needed for any company, let them have local copy + sync copy on the server as NC does, way modern and + you can easily host it on premises + open port and you allow them to work from home and access their files.

There are instances where a local file server is the best approach. I think even die hard fans of completely lanless designs cough cough @scottalanmiller cough cough would agree. I have clients who are in rural areas where internet connection speeds are simply too slow to be effective with any cloud storage technologies. Even their backups are taken offsite every night by their team because internet speeds can't support a cloud solution.

I also have clients who are in the graphics and video business. The file sizes they deal with make it mandatory that they use onsite file servers. For a double whammy, this particular graphics company is rural with poor internet speed.

Other cases where business owners are not "comfortable" using cloud only are still running local file servers. But slowly, we're winning them over, especially when some have had to recover backups that are cloud stored and were able to get back online quickly. Some do see the value while others can't handle it. At the end of the day, it is their business and as long as they aren't asking me to support them in a way that I think is detrimental, then they get their local file servers.

I think it may be more common to find equipment supporting 10Gb through fiber (at least that what I've seen).

I have 2 clients as well as my lab that run 10Gb and in each case over fiber. In terms of performance, actual file transfers between VMs and workstations runs 850MBps to 925MBps. Pretty happy to have that in place especially for large file server backups/restores or very large file transfers.

Nicely written post. I appreciate that you took the time to put your thoughts down.

I'm one of those who has a UTM (Sophos XG) on my lab network. I could replace it with a firewall I suppose but I also like to tinker and learn it so it keeps me occupied (maybe I spend more time on it then I should when I screw something up lol). To be honest, none of my clients have a UTM. I've never felt like they needed one. And while I DO have a UTM, I can also confirm that it HAS stopped bad things from happening. Is it because it was the first thing on the network edge to catch the bad thing? Yep, probably. Would my son's AV have caught it? I'll never really know. But like I said, I keep it because I like to tinker.

One thing that I've read over and over and over is that UTM's are generally NOT recommended. However, I'm interested in what use-cases people believe they may be a good fit. I often see "if you're going to use a UTM, get a Palo Alto" but would love to hear about when people think it IS a good fit.

Something else I want to ask. When I see "if you're going to use a UTM, get a Palo Alto", would love to know about WHY Palo Alto. I don't have any experience with them so I'd love to hear about what makes them the go-to. What do they have that the other offers don't? What do they do that is so different to place them head and shoulders above the rest?

For anyone who is trying to upgrade to latest stable version, the Nextcloud download site is currently unavailable.

@jospoortvliet

@NetworkNerd said in Pi-hole vs. Full Web Filter:

I keep hearing great things about using Pi-Hole (both here and from a colleague). But here's what I want to know - why use Pi-Hole instead of a full-blown web filter at the house? For those who are using it, what made you go Pi-Hole instead of the free home edition of Sophos, for example?

I run Sophos XG at home and after installing Pi-Hole I found Pi-Hole to be way more effective at blocking ads than Sophos XG ever was.

Anyone else having issues accessing the UBNT website? Getting cert errors in both Edge and Chrome and the site redirects to www.ui.com.

Another feature that I love to use on Synology is their Active Backup For Business, specifically for their scheduled rsync function that let's me pull all of my config files off the various Linux servers like Unifi (auto backup files), FreePBX backups, sound files...etc or even all the certs off my Nginx server. I find this method easier than setting up a network folder backup from each of the linux servers.

Incidentally, Willie Howe did a video about this setup a few days ago.

@Ylian said in Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect:

You guys get an premiere, I am posting this here first. I just published the all new MeshCentral Router for Windows. Allows TCP port mapping thru the MeshCentral server. Requires v0.3.0-t or later. You can RDP, PuTTY, WinSCP to remote computers. Youtube video demonstration here. Feedback & bug reports appreciated.

Now I HAVE to find time to get this server setup and test it. Very cool feature.

@scottalanmiller said in Dell server and storage...:

@RojoLoco said in Dell server and storage...:

I've used regular (non-Dell) drives in servers for a while, zero issues. The iDRAC will still show predicted failures, etc in my experience. However, I have had no success putting non-Dell drives into storage devices (we have an MD3xxx, it will not recognize regular drives).

Want to mention the specific drives that are working for you?

I have Kingston KC400 (SKC400S37/512G) drives in a R620 that work perfectly and show predicted failure...etc.

Welcome to Canada eh!

Here's your first tip...pronounce it like "Trono" instead of "Toronto" and you'll fit right in

I've setup Mautic for a client that seems to handle what you're looking for. You could create multiple target segments each with their own creative. It handled double opt-in as well as opt-outs automatically. You can setup contact frequency rules...etc. Could be worth a look.

I no longer have this client but for the 3+ years I supported them, they used Mautic as their email list platform.

https://www.mautic.org/

UBNT has also recently released a Unifi based option. Haven't tried those though.

https://store.ui.com/collections/unifi-network-routing-switching/products/unifi-building-to-building-bridge

I've also use the Cambium PTP550 on a few installs and they have been rock solid. Less than 7ms latency. Clients consistently get their max 500Mbps speeds over the PtP and price was really competitive. My largest deployment using the Cambium is for a shopping mall which handles all guest wifi as well as the main office and security services onsite. Max concurrent users (pre-pandemic) was ~500 to 1,000 on busy days and no problems handling load.

https://www.cambiumnetworks.com/products/backhaul/ptp-550/

@scottalanmiller said in Hardware Design for SAM-DR Small Rackmount Backup Device:

@NashBrydges said in Hardware Design for SAM-DR Small Rackmount Backup Device:

There's no talk of vendor here so I'll just ask Would these come from XByte?

That would be my recommendation In the US at least. @MattSpeller is in Canada, so while he can do that, the benefits are not the same.

Yeah I'm in Canada as well and last time I got a quote from XByte once and it was significantly higher than a local provider. Granted, they aren't the same in terms of NBD support, etc.

@KOOLER said in Accelerate your backups with StarWind Virtual Tape Library and Microsoft System Center Data Protection Manager:

Meanwhile StarWind VTL ...

StarWind VTL

... is going to have a major feature update announced on VeeamOn 2017 in New Orleans

What a tease! Lol. Now I'm guessing at what kind of integration could take place between Veeam and StarWind.

Well, turns out I was just blind. Found it. Ugh...gonna be one of those days.