|
anthonypants posted:Copyright (c) 1997-2007 Novell, Inc. That's also your answer to why it happens.
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 07:49 |
|
|
Caged posted:It does seem like there are a growing number of companies that 'get it' though when it comes to running IT. These also seem to be the places that subscribe to the idea that not making your offices a horrible place to be means your staff are happier and get more done. It's more the other way around. Any company that does things right now is just waiting for a new CEO to come along, implement cuts to all the cost centres, take a fat bonus from the increased profits in the short term and then disappear by the time the brain drain and crumbling infrastructure set in from underfunding all the support functions. Usually to another company where they'll do the exact same thing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 23:54
|
|
|
Pretty sure Oracle is the same, our DBA confused the hell out of me when he said a 4 core license was fine for an 8 core server.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
thebigcow posted:How is that supposed to work with a heatsink? It's not supposed to work with a heatsink, grasshopper. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
nitrogen posted:This is worth more than you know, man. If working for that guy would make you leave anyway, why not go for it and pick up the management experience? If you actually like it then great, if you don't and decide to leave in 6 months' time you'll have an easier time of it. It would be a difficult decision if there was an option to maintain the status quo but it sounds like that isn't on the table.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2013 12:44
|
|
|
Zamboni Apocalypse posted:What do you expect from a presiges healthcare company that offers dential? Go for an interview the beginning and Febrary and you might be trainning soon! Oh sory, when I wrote $52,000 in the last e mail it should bee $25,000, I asume your still intrested in the postion?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
I had that with my home desktop recently using an Atheros network card on Win7. Starting game updates on Steam would have a 50% chance of breaking my network adapter completely and only a reboot would fix it, even disabling and re-enabling it didn't work. I've updated my NIC driver since and the problem has stopped. It started out of the blue though so might be related to an MS patch or something.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
I'm trying to hammer this nail into the wall with a screwdriver but it won't go in straight, please fix my screwdriver! P.S. THIS IS AFFECTING PRODUCTION Seriously though this is why you should never accept functional problems for software. If anyone ever asks me about fixing an Excel formula I just tell them I have no idea and suggest they ask the finance department or someone else who uses Excel all day every day. Scikar fucked around with this message at 16:38 on Feb 17, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:This guy needs to be loving fired. It sounds like he doesn't have anything to do and if you're still mystified by DNS, you shouldn't be an IT DIRECTOR. And yet there's no shortage of IT Directors who can't even spell DNS, let alone understand it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Pissing me off today and every day until the end of days: Riverbed Steelheads. These things are amazing when they work, and utter, utter shite when they don't. Server 2012 R2 has apparently confused the everliving poo poo out of their development team. It took them a while to get SMB3 support in after 2012 came out, but eventually they got there. Then R2 comes out and they instantly break due to mangling the negotiated SMB dialect version in the new security check (amazingly they did this even when you tell them not to optimise anything, which happens ALL THE loving TIME). Now we have another issue where clients can't connect to a Server 2012 R2 server, even Windows 7 clients using SMB2. How the gently caress do you break this? For god knows what reason the client end Steelhead just holds onto the tree request that the client sends and then... does nothing with it. And then drops it after 5 minutes with an error that says there was no response from the server that it didn't forward the request to. So far Riverbed have told me that this because: We have some additional IP subnets that the client Steelhead can see but are not configured in the optimisation rules (these subnets are local, not used or even visible to any of the affected machines, and nothing on the other side of the Steelhead can route to them). We have not updated to the latest firmware version 8.5.2 (uh yeah actually that is exactly what we are running?). Our connection is too congested (100 Mbit symmetric fibre running at about 5% usage? Really?) We have not updated to the latest firmware version 8.5.2a. Our connection is too fast, the Steelhead unit is only licensed to optimise 10 Mb of traffic (they just pass through everything above, they agreed this is perfectly normal, and by the way a unit to support 100 Mbit costs 6 figures minimum). We have not updated to the latest firmware version 8.5.2b (did I mention only the first one has any mention of SMB and we had it already?). They now tell us to disable half of the SMB2 optimisations and... hey it works! So we turned off HTTPS optimisation because it breaks. We turned off HTTP because that breaks. We turned off MAPI because that breaks. We turned off SMB signing altogether because hey guess what, that breaks too! Now we're optimising half of SMB2 and nothing else and paying a massive pile of money on maintenance for the privilege. Scikar fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Mar 11, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
SEKCobra posted:Honestly if its some old pos which is being replaced theres no point cleaning, and Id be hlad for any more reason to just send it to the dump. That is a recent Elitebook which is 2 years old tops. e: Ugh too slow.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2014 11:12
|
|
|
Daylen Drazzi posted:I got requests for customer satisfaction surveys from Cisco for the tickets I put in earlier this week. My entire team came over to look at them and we all began laughing our asses off. I spent about 30 minutes making GBS threads all over the engineers and their pathetic excuse for service and gave them mostly zeroes, with a couple "no opinion" thrown in, then wrote out in explicit detail exactly how they screwed the pooch with us. Basically told them that the "Act of God" bullshit line was no excuse for blindly following a script to the exclusion of common sense or reading comprehension, and that before they start spouting that poo poo they should probably take a look at the service agreement of the customer. Am I the only one who doesn't get what you're trying to achieve here? If you have a problem with outsourced support you need to complain to your account manager that their support staff are clearly undertrained. All your survey is going to do is get some outsourced tech on a poverty wage fired and replaced with someone else to follow the same script and make the same mistakes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 10:45
|
|
|
seadweller posted:So we are moving away from landlines to skype for business - running on headsets through the PC. Is this as hosed up as it sounds given if the network goes down its bye bye phones as well? How often does your network go down? Unless you have something seriously wrong with your network it should be more reliable than an old school phone system. Lync/SfB itself has redundancy built in more or less everywhere as well. This includes SBAs which provide a local gateway at the office so you keep your phones even if your front end servers are hosted in an off-site datacentre and you lose connectivity. And if you're worried about fibre being cut by idiot contract workers in the neighbourhood then chances are they'll cut your phone line at the same time - so mobile is the best backup for that anyway. As for actual phones there's 3 "Lync-optimised" phones that run identical firmware and look almost the same as well. Polycom CX600 is the tidiest but there's not much between them. CX300 is a USB handset that has to connect through the PC. There are other "Lync-compatible" phones which means SIP phones originally designed for other systems that have added Lync compatibility - their drivers to link to the desktop app are universally terrible so avoid them like the plague. In my experience people switch to the headset after a while anyway, once they realise that they can click to dial and then carry on doing actual work while talking. If your users are more towards the dinosaur side then you might not have the same success.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Are there any headsets that sound great on SfB and don't sound like poo poo when listening T music or anything else? Alternately, is there a good external sound card that will do the same thing? Lync headsets are just standard USB headsets that the client talks to the same as any other device. Aside from MS quality testing the only thing they have over anything else is a button to start/end calls. If you care about music then just get a USB headset that you trust. That said there is a Sennheiser SC 60 Lync headset which is about £25 that I used for music all day with no complaints.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
Wrath of the Bitch King posted:They have access to a centralized SAN file system, it just can't handle high I/O over their pipe. That's the issue. Have a look at 1E Nomad. I don't know what the pricing is, but it's basically a LAN-only torrent client plugin for SCCM. When clients go to download a package, they'll grab it from other local clients first before going to the DP. You'll probably still want your maintenance windows anyway but Nomad might save your rear end for common things like Office installs.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
If you've already got inbound rules for WinRM then you can get through via native Powershell as well:code:
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
There are Group Policy settings to make the process easier, but for a single machine, you can run winrm quickconfig which will enable the WinRM listener and add the firewall exception, then all of your Powershell remote stuff just works as long as you have access to that machine.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
The Fool posted:You guys keep saying that we're not offering enough, but we're willing to pay $2-$3 or hour more than the next closest equivalent position. We're just not advertising that. If it's not advertised that you're offering more than anyone else, why would you expect people to apply to your job instead of one of the others?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
Depending on the timing involved I would be inclined to agree. Email is supposed to be non-interrupting, you send a request in one when you need someone to do something but the specific timing is up to them. Phone calls or face to face chat is an interruption, so when you need someone to do something right now you call them or go and find them. Messaging gets used in different ways but for me it's a quick question that isn't important enough to justify an email, so again I'd say it's the wrong choice for a business critical outage.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
Migishu posted:Things actually pissing me off: They gave me a "temp" password to log into my account, which they then won't let me change, or they might but it won't let me and just tells me it doesn't meet the complexity requirements, which it doesn't tell me what they are in the first place. This is for an AD account? The default minimum password age is 1 day, to stop you from circumventing the password history requirement by changing your password 10 times to cycle it back to the original one.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
vibur posted:Of course, if they just checked the box that makes you change it the next time you log in this wouldn't be a problem. Depends on the situation. If you are connecting via RDP from an untrusted source (i.e. a machine that isn't on the same domain as the server you're trying to reach) then you won't be permitted to set a new password from the login prompt and will be kicked because it has expired.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Migishu posted:So, for anyone who ever runs into this problem, the best solution is to stop using Cisco VPN Client (because it's out of support) and use ShrewSoft. Import your PCF files and bam, problems fixed. Cisco ended support for the old VPN client on 2014-07-29 and they gave 3 years notice to switch to the AnyConnect client instead. I think this is more the fault of whoever gave you the old client to use.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
ChickenWing posted:This has been and continues to be incredibly hosed up Why do you care? Leaving aside the godawful mess of at-will employment in the US, even other parts of the world with sensible employee right still have probation periods. If someone can't suss out that a new hire is an rear end in a top hat after 2 interviews and 6 months of being in the office every day then they are a bad manager. Consider how many people in this very thread have been screwed over by their employer, in some cases multiple times. You do not want to make it worse by allowing those bosses to give bullshit bad references on top.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:They can ping the gateway just fine though. Are they actually getting the gateway from DHCP?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
Are the clients getting the correct subnet mask as well as the gateway? And no other static routes involved? If you gave them a /8 mask when they're really on a /24 then they would still be able to reach their gateway when you ping it directly, but wouldn't attempt to use it to reach other addresses. In fact now that I think about it, if they have a mask of /0 it would explain all of your symptoms, assuming the DHCP server is on the same actual subnet but the internal aliases are on a different one.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
I think you can do both, depending on vendor. If I remember right on Brocade ICX at least, if you designate a port for clients then DHCP server traffic is blocked, but if you designate it as a server port then DHCP client traffic isn't forwarded. The default behavior when you enable DHCP snooping is for the switch to pre-populate its MAC and ARP tables, the blocking is optional.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
DigitalMocking posted:Pissing me off today: GAL weirdness. You probably don't want to know how to actually fix this since you'll just get more similar problems dumped on you. But with Lync if someone's details look fine when you look them up, but not for one user, 9 times out of 10 it's because that user has a contact saved in Outlook with those details in it. Lync gives personal contacts higher priority than the GAL.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:Do you have CALs for all devices that pull an IP address from a Microsoft DHCP server? Because per their licensing rules, you need one. This would include printers, IP phones, network devices, mobile devices, and guests. Only if you don't have user CALs for everyone using the device. And if you have people with multiple devices then why would you not use user CALs? I don't disagree that the licensing poo poo is hosed up (see also vendors who use core licensing where 1 core does not equal 1 core), but this one gets posted every few months and it's way overblown.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 10:40
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Someone keys in everyone's payroll from a spreadsheet from PayChex. MANUALLY. Because AS/400 guy never made a way for them to just be able to upload the loving CSV. There is always more useful stuff for accounting people to do than data entry. In a previous job they had an accounting team split in two, one side processed invoices, orders etc. and the other side double checked everything the first side did. There was no mechanism for reporting errors back to the first side, so one person would always make the same mistake and another would always correct it. When the team was restructured to fix this, the spare time gained was now spent checking what the invoices were actually for instead of just errors, and they immediately started to find all sorts of dodgy deals and backhanders that were slipping under the radar up to that point. It's amazing how useful people can be when they're actually managed well.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
Lync was able to talk to Skype ages ago, provided the Skype user signed in with a Microsoft account (which hardly anyone did).
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
MF_James posted:poo poo pissing me off today (and everyday): People passing the buck/Being needlessly obtuse and difficult. If you're asking the wrong person then passing the buck isn't the problem. What if the person you're asking has enough access to change the hostname, but doesn't have access to change the config of the monitoring system? Now you have a project critical host which is running for now but isn't being monitored correctly, and who is going to get poo poo on when it breaks? If there's a problem with a process then you have to escalate upwards, dealing solely with people who implement the process is only going to get one or both of you in trouble further down the line.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
nitrogen posted:As long as they are breaking their dev, stage, or test environments, I want them to break whatever they want. If you set corespersocket to anything other than 1, you can end up overriding the automatic NUMA layout in a suboptimal way. Your OS is seeing them all as a single NUMA node so I don't think corespersocket is causing your problem.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2016 14:18
|
|
|
nitrogen posted:Well, if I set them to corsepersocket=1 the problem goes away. corespersocket=1 is the VMware recommendation so yeah I would do that anyway. But usually with a NUMA node mismatch you would expect performance impact due to longer memory access times, it seems strange for the OS to schedule threads the way you're seeing when it has no way to know the node layout is wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
flosofl posted:Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. I feel like a lot of managers just aren't used to managing people who see themselves on an upward curve.* In a previous job I worked my way up from helpdesk to the sysadmin team over 2 years, and although I got a big salary bump for it, I was still on quite a bit less than the cost of hiring a new sysadmin would be. I got the impression that would be sorted out over time as I proved myself, but 2 reviews later I was just getting small bumps despite getting lots of praise and being told I was going places. Any attempt to argue I deserved more was met with the usual "you're already getting a bigger raise than the rest of your team, there's no budget for any more". I started dropping hints about some of the jobs advertised in the area, spoke openly with the resident office LinkedIn expert, that kind of thing, no reaction. After I hit 2 years of "don't be impatient, you could end up really high up eventually" I decided that while the job wasn't particularly bad, I wasn't going to pass up opportunities for big pay rises over several years waiting around to see if I might get promoted to a senior position, and started looking for a new job. I got an interview with a really exciting company in a much nicer city for a big pay increase, but I wasn't on bad terms with my manager so once I got an invite for a second interview in 3 weeks I told them so out of courtesy. 3 weeks and the second interview came and went, we started discussing a package, still not a peep from my existing manager. So naturally I accepted the new job, handed my resignation in. Conversation goes like this: Manager: "If you don't mind me asking, how much are they offering you?" Me: "I don't mind you asking, but I'd prefer not to say." Manager: "Well that's OK, but how are we supposed to negotiate in that case?" Me: "This isn't a negotiation! The time for that was when I told you I had a second interview. Now I have an offer that I've accepted, and everything you've told me to this point suggests you can't afford to match it anyway." He wasn't rude to me but I could tell he was pretty angry. I think my team leader (who was also in the room) must have had a word with him though, because the next day he called me into his office and apologised for not handling it better. His hands were tied by his own boss, but he realised that shouldn't be my problem. Since I left, the company has changed owners and about half of the department has been made redundant. Lesson learned: you don't necessarily have to be a mercenary to get anywhere, but sometimes things your boss promises aren't even in his control to keep. Edit: *OK maybe I phrased that badly, plenty of people wrongly believe they are on an upwards track, but if a manager says it themselves and then acts like that person will happy to stay in the same position for the medium term with minor cost of living increases, they are asking for trouble. Scikar fucked around with this message at 13:57 on Sep 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Is there something in chrome and certificates that makes it so much different than loving internet explorer? I have been in the process of properly assigning certs to admin consoles and such for https, but for some reason chrome hates them but internet explorer sees them as being fine. Chrome recently removed support for certificates that use the deprecated CommonName field only, and don't have a SubjectAlternativeName. Most guides out there for setting up an internal CA don't mention this, especially since it's a total pain in the rear end to do in OpenSSL (you have to either add the SAN entries in openssl.cnf or pass them through as envars). It's fairly painless when requesting a cert through AD CS though if your CA is on Windows.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
Why would you save your scripts in a format designed for notes when there are loads of free VCS options out there?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2017 11:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 07:49 |
|
|
I used to work for a company that had an absolute poo poo ton of access roles, position access, and company access on their ERP system. Setting up new employees was a pain to begin with, setting up employees who needed access to multiple subsidiary companies was awkward, creating new roles was a nightmare. And to top of it off some of the subsidiary companies were competing with one another, so they would try to be sneaky and request access to financial details for the other subsidiaries and then pass it off as "oh the form was confusing so I just ticked a bunch of boxes, OOPS!"
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2017 16:43
|
|