I would not use anything related to Quickbooks as an example of the best way to
do something.
Your only choices from Intuit are how you get screwed, not whether.
From: Travis Johnson via Af
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 9:02 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SM Isolation question
How do you figure? Everything will eventually be SaaS... and it's a much better
model for both sides. The software stays updated and current and bug fixes are
instant. The initial cost to start with the software is usually 1/10th what it
would be to buy, and it allows people to use the software from anywhere.
Many years ago, I was of the same opinion. Then I started to realize my time
(or anyone else's time) was better spent focusing on the product we sold rather
than installing/fixing/supporting someone else's software.
I know I personally spent at least 50+ hours over the previous 15 years
installing/fixing/supporting Quickbooks on our LAN. Getting it installed on a
server, setting up the shares, mapping drive letters, installing it on each PC,
etc. The software cost us $500 to buy, and then the yearly updates were usually
$200-$300. Or you can subscribe to the online version for $39/month and be done
with it. It's automatically backed up, you don't have to host it on your own
server, or worry about upgrade issues or users with problems, etc.
Time is money. Spend your time doing what you know how to do, and hire someone
else to do the other tasks. :)
Travis
On 10/15/2014 9:31 PM, Tyler Treat via Af wrote:
True story.
___________________________
Mangled by my iPhone.
___________________________
Tyler Treat
Corn Belt Technologies, Inc.
tyler.tr...@cornbelttech.com
___________________________
On Oct 15, 2014, at 10:30 PM, Jason McKemie via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote:
Yeah, SaaS is great for the company that owns it, not so great for everyone
else.
On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Travis Johnson via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote:
Nope... mainly SaaS companies and real estate. Best of both worlds. :)
Travis
On 10/15/2014 3:40 PM, Gino Villarini via Af wrote:
Someone told me you were getting into manufacturing��
Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr
On 10/15/14, 5:31 PM, "Travis Johnson via Af" <af@afmug.com> wrote:
It just depends on the day... :)
Involved in 11 companies now, and looking at a 12th. Always stuff
going
on. LOL
Travis
On 10/15/2014 3:16 PM, Gino Villarini via Af wrote:
Travis, are you getting bored at your current job? Lol!!
Great to see you active in the list!
Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr
On 10/15/14, 4:14 PM, "Travis Johnson via Af" <af@afmug.com> wrote:
The other issue is p2p traffic between two people on the same
AP....
and
if you are doing bandwidth shaping in your router, even at the
tower,
you will never see these packets. Or in the case the original
poster
asked about, that customer could keep a high-def window open of
all
their video cameras at the other location, using 3-4Mbps of
constant
traffic, and you would never see it.
Travis
On 10/15/2014 1:48 PM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af
wrote:
When you forward SM-to-SM traffic upstream, there's nothing the
router
can do about it. Put the two locations on different IP subnets
so that
traffic between the two has to be routed. Or turn off SM
isolation.
I leave SM isolation off because I'm not that paranoid. The
biggest
risk is broadcast/multicast crap flying around. So use the SM
uplink
broadcast/multicast rate limiting. This is one of the best
features of
Canopy, IMO.
On 10/15/2014 2:23 PM, Christopher Tyler via Af wrote:
We have a customer that has two SM's on the same AP at
separate
physical locations (home and office). The have a DVR at each
location
that they want to view. Everything is configured properly on
their
end to view the DVR's on port 80 through their routers.
Problem is
that we have SM isolation turned on with option 2 to forward
packets
upstream and they want to see the home when at the office and
the
office when at home.
So I set up a mangle rule in my Mikortik to mark the packets
with a
routing mark based on the SRC and DST addresses, and then
used a
static route for anything what that mark and send it back to
the AP
port. It doesn't work, what am I doing wrong, any suggestions
short
of disabling SM isolation?
