Re: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive at once

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Michael Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you have corporate license then you can transfer the license between
> machines and at any one time you would only have one "machine" so a
> single license would seem to fit.

  The MSFT rep's I've talked to so far quote chapter and verse from
the Product Use Rights.  I don't have the file in front of me, but
they point to the clause that states you cannot make copies without
licenses.  Since these are installed instances on different drives,
that's making copies.  As they read things, anyway.

  Another thing the license documentation doesn't really cover one way
or the other is that workstation OS volume licenses are "Upgrade
Only".  You're only permitted to use the license seat you're upgrading
for one upgrade.  So, from that point-of-view, for the OS, I need
multiple FPP seats!

> I would have no problems in recommending this sort of situation as being
> appropriate for a corporate license.

  Part of my issue is that we'll be audited for compliance with
regulations, and that can include demonstrating proof-of-license for
any commercial software we're using.

  I also don't want to get stuck with a situation where Vista decides
to turn itself off because it wants to be re-activated for whatever
asinine reason.  I've had enough hassles with activation in situations
where I'm fully within what Microsoft says is legit that I don't want
to take chances if they're already saying I won't be okay.  Who knows,
maybe some future "Genuine Advantage" update to Windows will decide
that "different hard disk == re-activate".

> One caveat would depend on the end users. If the drives are being
> isolated as they belong to different companies ...

  All one company, just different government programs/projects.

> You will probably struggle to get it in writing.

  That's the trouble.  As they saying goes, verbal agreements aren't
worth the paper they're written on.  And the fact that one can get
different answers depending on which rep you talk to doesn't exactly
give me a warm fuzzy.

> Hope this helps.

 Well, it at least feels good to hear others agreeing with my own
interpretations.  :)

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive at once

[Ben Scott]

On 7/17/08, E. Peeters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Afraid I'm not going to help, but an OEM license states that a system is
> the sum of: -a CPU; -a motherboard; -a power supply; -a hard drive.

  Got a reference for that?  I've checked the EULA that came with a
Win XP Pro OEM install, and it states only that:

#> the computer system or computer system component ("HARDWARE")

#> The term "COMPUTER" as used herein shall mean the
#> HARDWARE, if the HARDWARE is a single
#> computer system, or shall mean the computer system
#> with which the HARDWARE operates, if the
#> HARDWARE is a computer system component.

  This file has ID "EULAID:XPSP2_RM.0_PRO_OEM_EN".

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Single Sign On

[Phil Brutsche]

I have some experience with this stuff, so I'll throw in my comments:

a) Samba+WINBIND: Definitely works.  HOWEVER, for transparent
authentication the application must support NTLM. If the application
doesn't support NTLM you'll get authentication requests.

b) LDAP: Linux can most definitely authenticate with ActiveDirectory
using standard LDAP queries. Just keep in mind there are (seemingly)
10,000,000 different ways of authenticating with LDAP. Some of the
variations I've seen:
 * read the user's plain-text password directly from LDAP
 * read the user's MD5 or SHA1 hashed password directly from LDAP and
compare that with a MD5/SHA1 hash generated from the password the user
entered
 * Authenticate to the LDAP server using some pre-defined credentials,
search the directory to ensure the user exists, grab the DN, then
re-authenticate using the previously-found DN and the provided password
 * Assume the users's DN matches a certain template (ie
cn=$username,cn=users,dc=domain,dc=local) and use the provided password;
if authentication succeeds then the user provided good credentials

For the first 2 I have to say "what the h-e-double-hockey sticks were
they thinking when they came up with that".

The last 2 are the ones that will work with AD.

The only Microsoft-specific extensions I've run into are for changing
the user's password.

c) Kerberos: Linux can most definitely authenticate with AD via
Kerberos. To my knowledge no special setup is required; IME it is truly
and honestly no different than authenticating against any other vendor's
KDC.

d) NIS/YP: Most definitely works. I've done it with SFU on Windows 2000
DCs. SFU has been integrated into Windows Server 2003 R2 and Windows
Server 2008, you just need to make sure you add the appropriate components.

Ben Scott wrote:
>   This is definitely possible, in the general case.
> 
>   There are two approachs to this kind of thing, get Linux to speak
> Microsoft protocol to the Windows box, or get the Windows box to speak
> Unix protocol to the Linux box.  Either one can work.
> 
>   Linux can act as an Active Directory domain member using Samba and
> "winbind".  This can give you full user account information, including
> groups, password authentication, etc.  I've done this; it works pretty
> good.  Advantages: No need to learn about Unix protocols.
> Disadvantages: Integration may not be as "smooth", as the Windows
> network protocols aren't designed to support Unix concepts.
> 
>   Linux can speak Kerberos and LDAP, two protocols which Active
> Directory is built on.  I've successfully queried AD using LDAP from
> Linux to get information like names, email addresses, and groups.
> I've never tried to do password authentication with this.  Advantages:
> LDAP can store just about anything you want, including Unix account
> info.  Disadvantages: I remember reading that Microsoft used some
> proprietary extensions to Kerb/LDAP to implement password
> authentication, which the standard stuff on Linux might not support.
> 
>   Windows can supposedly speak Unix protocols (like NFS and NIS/YP) to
> Linux.  Never tried this.  Advantages: Unix software think they're
> talking to a Windows box, which might yield smoother integration.
> Disadvantages: You have to figure out all that stuff.
> 
>   Some of this stuff might need Windows Services For Unix (SFU), or
> whatever they're calling it now, but that's supposed to be a "free"
> add-on.
> 
> -- Ben
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~


-- 

Phil Brutsche
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: ???: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Carl Houseman]

Thanks!  Probably futile but I went ahead and sent the e-mail I received to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: Miller Bonnie L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:38 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: FW: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

FYI--

-Original Message-
From: Webmaster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:16 PM
To: Miller Bonnie L.; Stu Sjouwerman; Webmaster
Subject: RE: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Hi Bonnie,

The actual subscribed email was [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Deleted.

Regards,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


From: Miller Bonnie L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 14:49
To: Stu Sjouwerman; Webmaster
Subject: FW: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref



Stu, would you or someone else be able to check on this?  Looks like
people posting to ntsysadmin are getting these replies from
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  Not sure if this is just someone's
auto-reply, but maybe that address is subbed to the list?



Thanks,
Bonnie Miller



From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:38 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref



Look at the thread on Forced Computer Naming Convention.



Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I think it was Bob Free that menitioned that he had just gotten
something similar in another thread today.  I guess there is a lurker
wanting to sell stuff to us.



Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?

Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages
and
sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Dear Carl Houseman,

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457:
"RE:
Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been
created
and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to
you
shortly.

Thank you,
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~







..

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

[Jim Majorowicz]

Shudda known I was beat to the punch line.

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 7:47 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Peak10 as a co-lo?

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Tim Vander Kooi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Mmmm...Cake!!!

The cake is a lie.

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

[Jim Majorowicz]

The Cake is a lie!

-Original Message-
From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 7:45 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

Mmmm...Cake!!!

-Original Message-
From: Andy Shook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:14 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

Dude,
Just looking for a customer's prospective and experiences, so shut your
cake hole... :)

Shook
-Original Message-
From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 4:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

Coolio...

So if you have a friend there, you don't just trust his advice on using
them
as a co-lo? ;)

 - Andy O.

>-Original Message-
>From: Andy Shook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 2:55 PM
>To: NT System Admin Issues
>Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?
>
>Just fired off an email to one of my friends who work's there.  I'll
let
>you know what happens...


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

[Ken Schaefer]

Oh - if you have a third party cert that you want to install into a system, 
then the cert will initially only have the public key. You need to match it up 
with the private key, then export the cert (with both keys), and then install 
it on the other system

Cheers
Ken

> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Majorowicz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, 18 July 2008 9:29 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: signing certificates for Apache in SBS
>
> The Apache are a bunch of lowdown dirty sidewinders that'll bite'cha as soon
> as look at'cha.
>
> .
> .
> .
>
> Wait, we're not filming a 50's Western here?  My bad.  You should be able to
> apply your 3rd party cert to both, but you may have to do it once for each
> as a separate system.  How you do it in Apache, I haven't a clue.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:04 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: signing certificates for Apache in SBS
>
> Should this work with Apache?
>
> Miguel
>
> Benjamin Zachary - Lists wrote:
> > You go into IIS, then under the web site you wish to use and then in the
> > Security tab when you look at SSL it should tell you there isn't one and
> > then let you create a certreq.txt or whatever type you require. Then use
> > that against the CA to generate your keyfile which you import back into
> IIS
> > and then enable HTTPS.
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:44 PM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: signing certificates for Apache in SBS
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   Sorry for the cross posting, I don't know if in the Exchange mailing
> > list I'd get the answer or is better to pose this question here
> >
> >   We have a signed CA by Equifax and I'd like to know if I could sign
> > certificates for our Apache Web servers. I have tried to issue a
> > certificate request from apache but when I import it in the
> > Certification Authority it says that is not following the right
> > template. I've seen there is a Web Server template, but I don't know
> >
> > 1) How to create a certificate request in SBS
> >
> > 2) If this will work under Apache
> >
> > Any experience, howto or documentation?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Miguel
> >
> >
> >
> > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > ~   ~
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > ~   ~
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1558 - Release Date: 7/17/2008
> 9:56 AM
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

[Jim Majorowicz]

The Apache are a bunch of lowdown dirty sidewinders that'll bite'cha as soon
as look at'cha.

.
.
.

Wait, we're not filming a 50's Western here?  My bad.  You should be able to
apply your 3rd party cert to both, but you may have to do it once for each
as a separate system.  How you do it in Apache, I haven't a clue.

-Original Message-
From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:04 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

Should this work with Apache?

Miguel

Benjamin Zachary - Lists wrote:
> You go into IIS, then under the web site you wish to use and then in the
> Security tab when you look at SSL it should tell you there isn’t one and
> then let you create a certreq.txt or whatever type you require. Then use
> that against the CA to generate your keyfile which you import back into
IIS
> and then enable HTTPS. 
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:44 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: signing certificates for Apache in SBS
>
> Hi,
>
>   Sorry for the cross posting, I don't know if in the Exchange mailing 
> list I'd get the answer or is better to pose this question here
>
>   We have a signed CA by Equifax and I'd like to know if I could sign
> certificates for our Apache Web servers. I have tried to issue a
> certificate request from apache but when I import it in the
> Certification Authority it says that is not following the right
> template. I've seen there is a Web Server template, but I don't know
>
> 1) How to create a certificate request in SBS
>
> 2) If this will work under Apache
>
> Any experience, howto or documentation?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Miguel
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1558 - Release Date: 7/17/2008
9:56 AM
>
>
>
>   



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

[Ken Schaefer]

The certificate request you generate is in a standard format. If you want to 
know how to generate one for your particular webserver just to go one of the 
SSL vendor's websites (e.g. GoDaddy, Digicert etc). They have instructions on 
generating certificate request files for all the major web servers.

Then, instead of submitting the certificate request to the SSL vendor, submit 
it to your existing Windows CA

Cheers
Ken

> -Original Message-
> From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, 18 July 2008 7:04 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: signing certificates for Apache in SBS
>
> Should this work with Apache?
>
> Miguel
>
> Benjamin Zachary - Lists wrote:
> > You go into IIS, then under the web site you wish to use and then in the
> > Security tab when you look at SSL it should tell you there isn't one and
> > then let you create a certreq.txt or whatever type you require. Then use
> > that against the CA to generate your keyfile which you import back into IIS
> > and then enable HTTPS.
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:44 PM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: signing certificates for Apache in SBS
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   Sorry for the cross posting, I don't know if in the Exchange mailing
> > list I'd get the answer or is better to pose this question here
> >
> >   We have a signed CA by Equifax and I'd like to know if I could sign
> > certificates for our Apache Web servers. I have tried to issue a
> > certificate request from apache but when I import it in the
> > Certification Authority it says that is not following the right
> > template. I've seen there is a Web Server template, but I don't know
> >
> > 1) How to create a certificate request in SBS
> >
> > 2) If this will work under Apache
> >
> > Any experience, howto or documentation?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Miguel


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: SSL cert question

[Ken Schaefer]

What do you mean by "no registered certs". You must have a cert on the IIS 
server (otherwise you can't use HTTPS), and that cert must be issued by a 
trusted root CA for Outlook to accept it (otherwise, Outlook 2007 at least, 
displays an error about the cert)

Cheers
Ken

From: Gavin Wilby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 18 July 2008 4:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SSL cert question

"or RPC over HTTPS then those features will fail"

Are you entirly sure about that - I only ask cos I have two sbs sites that use 
RPC over HTTPS in Outlook and they have *no* registered certs at all, and the 
connection still works.

Or is it more of a case of a valid cert expiring that causes the failure.
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Simon Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you are using Exchange 2003 and are using Exchange ActiveSync or RPC over 
HTTPS then those features will fail completely as they cannot cope with the 
certificate prompt.
If the certificate is being used to secure SMTP/POP3/IMAP connections then 
those will also fail, particularly if it is being used to secure incoming email 
on TLS/SMTPS.

Basically anything that uses SSL transparently will stop working.

Simon.



--
Simon Butler
MVP: Exchange, MCSE
Amset IT Solutions Ltd.

e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
w: www.amset.co.uk
w: www.amset.info

Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with Windows Mobile 5.0?
http://CertificatesForExchange.com/ for 
certificates from just $23.99.
Need a domain for your certificate? 
http://DomainsForExchange.net/


-Original Message-
From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 16 July 2008 18:40
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SSL cert question

That's pretty much exactly my question.  We have one that expires next week, 
and since the state doesn't have a budget yet, I'm not allowed to renew it, or 
even pay $15.00 out of my own pocket to get a GoDaddy cert.  So, my boss is 
asking me if there are security concerns with users accessing through an 
expired cert, and I just want to be sure one way or the other before giving my 
"certified" answer...

Joe Heaton
-Original Message-
From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SSL cert question

If you're talking about a cert for a web site, clients requesting it will be
notified that the cert is expired and warned that there could be problems
with it.  To my knowledge, if they accept the risk of accepting an expired
cert, the encryption still takes place, same as if they accept a cert from a
non-globally recognized CA.

 - Andy O.

From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 12:28 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: SSL cert question

If you have an SSL cert, and it expires, what, if any, functionality is
lost?

Joe Heaton
AISA
Employment Training Panel
1100 J Street, 4th Floor
Sacramento, CA  95814
(916) 327-5276
[EMAIL PROTECTED]





~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1555 - Release Date: 7/16/2008 6:43 
AM

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive at once

[Michael Hoffman]

OEM is OEM - it is tied to the machine it is installed on and that means
the motherboard. Royalty OEM (DELL,HP etc) have a BIOS check in them so
that activation is not required, but these are the technical details
rather that the legal details. Just because a machine doesn't ask for
activation doesn't mean it's not legally licensed. Certain numbers of
changes on the system trigger a reactivation and the definition of a
system on the MS website is the motherboard that comes with a machine.
If you think about this from a customer support point of view it all
makes sense as you can literally change everything except the
motherboard and the machine is still a Dell or HP, but if the
motherboard changes then all bets are off and so you need a new license.
At the same time if the machine's motherboard fails and is under
warranty then replacing it with an equivalent might require
re-activation but is covered under the license.

As far as what you are trying to achieve then there are a number of
issues. You can build your own machine, install Vista on it and office
on it and then activate both. If you replace the hard drive and do a
reinstall then you can do the same again. Activation will only detect
the change in HDD, so you could have 10 drives and still not have
problems activating - in theory at least!

If you have corporate license then you can transfer the license between
machines and at any one time you would only have one "machine" so a
single license would seem to fit. Equally if you were to use a SPLA
license then the machine would be used by a single user and so only a
single license would been needed for both. This is a situation that does
not fit the only oem/retail model and so the sales people at Microsoft
will give a silly response. I know that with 4 years experience of being
a Microsoft Licensing Sales Expert I would have no problems in
recommending this sort of situation as being appropriate for a corporate
license.

One caveat would depend on the end users. If the drives are being
isolated as they belong to different companies, then a ownership of the
machines becomes an issue - and I would advise that each company supply
its own license. If this is just work for clients then in the same way
as you can install a number of virtual machines on a host for logistical
reasons then this would seem to follow that logic.

This is really a situation where you could probably get away with it
without telling Microsoft, but really should be commended for bringing
to their attention as a situation which requires further consideration.
I'm sure most people here would agree that a corporate or retail license
(not upgrade) would count as 'doing the right thing' and that you could
get someone at Microsoft to agree with that for you. You will probably
struggle to get it in writing.

Hope this helps.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 17 July 2008 21:27
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer,
single drive at once

There are 2 types of OEM licenses. You are referring to a FULL OEM
license. The OEM license installed by the manufacturer and is tied only
to the BIOS of the machine, you can literally change everything but the
motherboard and still be compliant.
Tim

-Original Message-
From: E. Peeters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:01 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer,
single drive at once

Afraid I'm not going to help, but an OEM license states that a system is
the sum of:
-a CPU;
-a motherboard;
-a power supply;
-a hard drive.

Not a lawyer, but my guess is, change one of the components above and
you have a different system.

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:18 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single
drive at once

Hi everybody (Hi Dr. Nick!)...

  Scenario: One computer.  Computer has a removable hard disk drive
(like one of these: http://tinyurl.com/CRUDataPort3).  Only one spot
in the computer for the removable carrier, so only one hard disk at a
time can be used.  There will be several hard disks, each with its own
installed instance of Windows and Office.  But they will only be used
with that one host PC, and only one at a time.  (The disks contain
data we are required to keep physically separated -- by an "air gap"
-- at all times.)

  Question: Do I need a license seat for each hard disk?

  My take: Only one license per computer should be needed.  It's all
one computer.  I won't ever be able to *use* more than one seat at a
time.  When it comes to OEM licenses, the license is part of the
computer it is sold with.  If I take the disk out of the PC and put it
in a different PC, I need a license for that other PC.  If that
principle is applied uniformly, a license purchased with a com

Re: While on the DNS kick

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 5:51 PM, Michael Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unless im missing something, the problem I see is that the root servers rule
> the web.. that's why the are the ROOT servers.

  Details of the "new" exploit technique have not been publically
disclosed, but what information is available suggests the issue is
with forged query responses being used to poison (hijack) a DNS cache.
 So it won't affect authoritative-only servers (which the root and
GTLD nameservers are).

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: While on the DNS kick

[David Lum]

Protection isn't what I'm after - I have a super-small client that I need to 
keep students from getting to several types of websites, and the OpenDNS 
features fit the bill perfectly, for the right price and learning curve.

Thanks!
Dave Lum  - Systems Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - (971)-222-1025
"..remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the 
back of the tiger ended up inside"  - JFK



From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:52 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

Although, I will add, thinking that will protect you may very well be 
short-sighted. As Ben and Ed have said earlier (and I completely agree with), 
there will be exploits. How they will present is, as yet, unknown. You are 
going to need to fix every DNS server and DNS proxy as quickly as you can.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:45 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

Thanks Michaeland Ben I guess...lol

Dave

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

No. opendns and djbdns are both good solutions.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:16 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

Bump

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: While on the DNS kick

Is there a compelling reason NOT to use OpenDNS as forwarders for DNS servers 
that are currently just using the root servers to route DNS currently?

Dave Lum
Systems Engineer
" When you step on the brakes your life is in your foot's hands."

















~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: While on the DNS kick

[Michael Ross]

Unless im missing something, the problem I see is that the root servers rule
the web.. that's why the are the ROOT servers.

Even openDNS has to look to them at some point right? If I'm wrong , then
I'm wrong.

But if they do, then there's still a flaw in using openDNS, as they would
eventually go to the root servers, which could be affected right?

 

Ok flame me cuz I could be wrong.

 

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:16 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

 

Bump

 

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: While on the DNS kick

 

Is there a compelling reason NOT to use OpenDNS as forwarders for DNS
servers that are currently just using the root servers to route DNS
currently?

 

Dave Lum 
Systems Engineer 
" When you step on the brakes your life is in your foot's hands." 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: While on the DNS kick

[Michael B. Smith]

Although, I will add, thinking that will protect you may very well be
short-sighted. As Ben and Ed have said earlier (and I completely agree
with), there will be exploits. How they will present is, as yet, unknown.
You are going to need to fix every DNS server and DNS proxy as quickly as
you can.

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith

MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

http://TheEssentialExchange.com

 

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:45 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

 

Thanks Michael..and Ben I guess.lol

 

Dave

 

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

 

No. opendns and djbdns are both good solutions.

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith

MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

http://TheEssentialExchange.com

 

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:16 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

 

Bump

 

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: While on the DNS kick

 

Is there a compelling reason NOT to use OpenDNS as forwarders for DNS
servers that are currently just using the root servers to route DNS
currently?

 

Dave Lum 
Systems Engineer 
" When you step on the brakes your life is in your foot's hands." 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: While on the DNS kick

[David Lum]

Thanks Michaeland Ben I guess...lol

Dave

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

No. opendns and djbdns are both good solutions.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:16 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

Bump

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: While on the DNS kick

Is there a compelling reason NOT to use OpenDNS as forwarders for DNS servers 
that are currently just using the root servers to route DNS currently?

Dave Lum
Systems Engineer
" When you step on the brakes your life is in your foot's hands."











~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: While on the DNS kick

[Michael B. Smith]

No. opendns and djbdns are both good solutions.

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith

MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

http://TheEssentialExchange.com

 

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:16 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: While on the DNS kick

 

Bump

 

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: While on the DNS kick

 

Is there a compelling reason NOT to use OpenDNS as forwarders for DNS
servers that are currently just using the root servers to route DNS
currently?

 

Dave Lum 
Systems Engineer 
" When you step on the brakes your life is in your foot's hands." 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

[Benjamin Zachary - Lists]

I thought you had an apache server handing out certs and you wanted to make
an https cert for the sbs server. Are you saying you have a CertSrv on SBS
and you want to have apache request one? 

I would imagine that could be done if you can create the correct export.txt
request file from apache that windows cert would understand. You could just
goto the sbs/certsrv site, create a new cert and assign it the name and such
and then save it and bring it over to the apache and install it (.pfx?) its
not going to authenticate correctly anyway in a browser so probably doesn’t
matter the name as long as you get the encryption working. 

-Original Message-
From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:04 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

Should this work with Apache?

Miguel

Benjamin Zachary - Lists wrote:
> You go into IIS, then under the web site you wish to use and then in the
> Security tab when you look at SSL it should tell you there isn’t one and
> then let you create a certreq.txt or whatever type you require. Then use
> that against the CA to generate your keyfile which you import back into
IIS
> and then enable HTTPS. 
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:44 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: signing certificates for Apache in SBS
>
> Hi,
>
>   Sorry for the cross posting, I don't know if in the Exchange mailing 
> list I'd get the answer or is better to pose this question here
>
>   We have a signed CA by Equifax and I'd like to know if I could sign
> certificates for our Apache Web servers. I have tried to issue a
> certificate request from apache but when I import it in the
> Certification Authority it says that is not following the right
> template. I've seen there is a Web Server template, but I don't know
>
> 1) How to create a certificate request in SBS
>
> 2) If this will work under Apache
>
> Any experience, howto or documentation?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Miguel
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1558 - Release Date: 7/17/2008
9:56 AM
>
>
>
>   



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: While on the DNS kick

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 5:15 PM, David Lum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bump

  Burp.

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Single Sign On

[Bill Lambert]

Thanks, Ben...this gives me a place to start.  Now all I have to do is
figure it all out...heh.

Bill Lambert
Concuity
847-941-9206
 

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Single Sign On

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Bill Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> We have an extremely large customer that would like to be able to use
SSO so
> their users can log into Active Directory and use the same credentials
to an
> intranet site that is Linux based.  The application currently uses
LDAP
> authentication and the passwords are also stored in the database of
the
> application.

  This is definitely possible, in the general case.

  There are two approachs to this kind of thing, get Linux to speak
Microsoft protocol to the Windows box, or get the Windows box to speak
Unix protocol to the Linux box.  Either one can work.

  Linux can act as an Active Directory domain member using Samba and
"winbind".  This can give you full user account information, including
groups, password authentication, etc.  I've done this; it works pretty
good.  Advantages: No need to learn about Unix protocols.
Disadvantages: Integration may not be as "smooth", as the Windows
network protocols aren't designed to support Unix concepts.

  Linux can speak Kerberos and LDAP, two protocols which Active
Directory is built on.  I've successfully queried AD using LDAP from
Linux to get information like names, email addresses, and groups.
I've never tried to do password authentication with this.  Advantages:
LDAP can store just about anything you want, including Unix account
info.  Disadvantages: I remember reading that Microsoft used some
proprietary extensions to Kerb/LDAP to implement password
authentication, which the standard stuff on Linux might not support.

  Windows can supposedly speak Unix protocols (like NFS and NIS/YP) to
Linux.  Never tried this.  Advantages: Unix software think they're
talking to a Windows box, which might yield smoother integration.
Disadvantages: You have to figure out all that stuff.

  Some of this stuff might need Windows Services For Unix (SFU), or
whatever they're calling it now, but that's supposed to be a "free"
add-on.

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: While on the DNS kick

[David Lum]

Bump

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: While on the DNS kick

Is there a compelling reason NOT to use OpenDNS as forwarders for DNS servers 
that are currently just using the root servers to route DNS currently?

Dave Lum
Systems Engineer
" When you step on the brakes your life is in your foot's hands."





~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

[Miguel Gonzalez Castaños]

Should this work with Apache?

Miguel

Benjamin Zachary - Lists wrote:

You go into IIS, then under the web site you wish to use and then in the
Security tab when you look at SSL it should tell you there isn’t one and
then let you create a certreq.txt or whatever type you require. Then use
that against the CA to generate your keyfile which you import back into IIS
and then enable HTTPS. 



-Original Message-
From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:44 PM

To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

Hi,

  Sorry for the cross posting, I don't know if in the Exchange mailing 
list I'd get the answer or is better to pose this question here


  We have a signed CA by Equifax and I'd like to know if I could sign
certificates for our Apache Web servers. I have tried to issue a
certificate request from apache but when I import it in the
Certification Authority it says that is not following the right
template. I've seen there is a Web Server template, but I don't know

1) How to create a certificate request in SBS

2) If this will work under Apache

Any experience, howto or documentation?

Thanks,

Miguel



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1558 - Release Date: 7/17/2008 9:56 AM




  




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

[Benjamin Zachary - Lists]

You go into IIS, then under the web site you wish to use and then in the
Security tab when you look at SSL it should tell you there isn’t one and
then let you create a certreq.txt or whatever type you require. Then use
that against the CA to generate your keyfile which you import back into IIS
and then enable HTTPS. 


-Original Message-
From: Miguel Gonzalez Castaños [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:44 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: signing certificates for Apache in SBS

Hi,

  Sorry for the cross posting, I don't know if in the Exchange mailing 
list I'd get the answer or is better to pose this question here

  We have a signed CA by Equifax and I'd like to know if I could sign
certificates for our Apache Web servers. I have tried to issue a
certificate request from apache but when I import it in the
Certification Authority it says that is not following the right
template. I've seen there is a Web Server template, but I don't know

1) How to create a certificate request in SBS

2) If this will work under Apache

Any experience, howto or documentation?

Thanks,

Miguel



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Single Sign On

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Bill Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We have an extremely large customer that would like to be able to use SSO so
> their users can log into Active Directory and use the same credentials to an
> intranet site that is Linux based.  The application currently uses LDAP
> authentication and the passwords are also stored in the database of the
> application.

  This is definitely possible, in the general case.

  There are two approachs to this kind of thing, get Linux to speak
Microsoft protocol to the Windows box, or get the Windows box to speak
Unix protocol to the Linux box.  Either one can work.

  Linux can act as an Active Directory domain member using Samba and
"winbind".  This can give you full user account information, including
groups, password authentication, etc.  I've done this; it works pretty
good.  Advantages: No need to learn about Unix protocols.
Disadvantages: Integration may not be as "smooth", as the Windows
network protocols aren't designed to support Unix concepts.

  Linux can speak Kerberos and LDAP, two protocols which Active
Directory is built on.  I've successfully queried AD using LDAP from
Linux to get information like names, email addresses, and groups.
I've never tried to do password authentication with this.  Advantages:
LDAP can store just about anything you want, including Unix account
info.  Disadvantages: I remember reading that Microsoft used some
proprietary extensions to Kerb/LDAP to implement password
authentication, which the standard stuff on Linux might not support.

  Windows can supposedly speak Unix protocols (like NFS and NIS/YP) to
Linux.  Never tried this.  Advantages: Unix software think they're
talking to a Windows box, which might yield smoother integration.
Disadvantages: You have to figure out all that stuff.

  Some of this stuff might need Windows Services For Unix (SFU), or
whatever they're calling it now, but that's supposed to be a "free"
add-on.

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

signing certificates for Apache in SBS

[Miguel Gonzalez Castaños]

Hi,

 Sorry for the cross posting, I don't know if in the Exchange mailing 
list I'd get the answer or is better to pose this question here


 We have a signed CA by Equifax and I'd like to know if I could sign
certificates for our Apache Web servers. I have tried to issue a
certificate request from apache but when I import it in the
Certification Authority it says that is not following the right
template. I've seen there is a Web Server template, but I don't know

1) How to create a certificate request in SBS

2) If this will work under Apache

Any experience, howto or documentation?

Thanks,

Miguel



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: File Copy

[Benjamin Zachary - Lists]

You could use winrar and break it up by size, like 5 or 10gb and then just
unrar it on the other side. At least if theres an issue you can continue or
resend just that size. 


-Original Message-
From: Angus Scott-Fleming [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:06 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: File Copy

On 15 Jul 2008 at 13:27, Jeff Harris  wrote:

> I'm having a problem copying a file that is 116gb to a different server.
The
> strange thing is, I did it before, but now I can't.  I have tried
compressing
> the file and copying it, but when I try to uncompress it, I get an error. 
> The file is a video file that we absolutely need.  Any thoughts? 

Worst case you could use a file-splitter to break it up and copy the pieces,

then re-assemble it at the target.

File Splitters, freeware and multi-platform: HJSplit
http://www.freebyte.com/hjsplit/

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22file+splitter%22+freeware

--
Angus Scott-Fleming
GeoApps, Tucson, Arizona
1-520-290-5038
+---+




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~





~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

FW: ???: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Miller Bonnie L .]

FYI--

-Original Message-
From: Webmaster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:16 PM
To: Miller Bonnie L.; Stu Sjouwerman; Webmaster
Subject: RE: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone 
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Hi Bonnie,

The actual subscribed email was [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Deleted.

Regards,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


From: Miller Bonnie L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 14:49
To: Stu Sjouwerman; Webmaster
Subject: FW: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref



Stu, would you or someone else be able to check on this?  Looks like
people posting to ntsysadmin are getting these replies from
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  Not sure if this is just someone's
auto-reply, but maybe that address is subbed to the list?



Thanks,
Bonnie Miller



From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:38 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref



Look at the thread on Forced Computer Naming Convention.



Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I think it was Bob Free that menitioned that he had just gotten
something similar in another thread today.  I guess there is a lurker
wanting to sell stuff to us.



Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?

Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages
and
sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Dear Carl Houseman,

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457:
"RE:
Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been
created
and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to
you
shortly.

Thank you,
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~







..

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive at once

[Tim Vander Kooi]

There are 2 types of OEM licenses. You are referring to a FULL OEM license. The 
OEM license installed by the manufacturer and is tied only to the BIOS of the 
machine, you can literally change everything but the motherboard and still be 
compliant.
Tim

-Original Message-
From: E. Peeters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:01 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive 
at once

Afraid I'm not going to help, but an OEM license states that a system is
the sum of:
-a CPU;
-a motherboard;
-a power supply;
-a hard drive.

Not a lawyer, but my guess is, change one of the components above and
you have a different system.

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:18 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single
drive at once

Hi everybody (Hi Dr. Nick!)...

  Scenario: One computer.  Computer has a removable hard disk drive
(like one of these: http://tinyurl.com/CRUDataPort3).  Only one spot
in the computer for the removable carrier, so only one hard disk at a
time can be used.  There will be several hard disks, each with its own
installed instance of Windows and Office.  But they will only be used
with that one host PC, and only one at a time.  (The disks contain
data we are required to keep physically separated -- by an "air gap"
-- at all times.)

  Question: Do I need a license seat for each hard disk?

  My take: Only one license per computer should be needed.  It's all
one computer.  I won't ever be able to *use* more than one seat at a
time.  When it comes to OEM licenses, the license is part of the
computer it is sold with.  If I take the disk out of the PC and put it
in a different PC, I need a license for that other PC.  If that
principle is applied uniformly, a license purchased with a computer,
used with that computer, with multiple hard drives, is okay.

  Microsoft Sales verbally insists I need a license seat for each, and
I cannot find a formal document stating otherwise.

  Does anyone have a URL or document title I can refer to that
contradicts this?

  Or are we going to have to buy several seats of Vista and Office for
this one PC?  Retail box for Vista, too, since OS Volume Licenses are
"Upgrade Only".  I'm going to end up having to spend over $4000 on
Vista and Office licenses on this one PC!

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive at once

[Carl Houseman]

Hard drive fails and your XP OEM license is toast?
Power supply fails and your XP OEM license is toast?

Fairly ridiculous you must agree.

I think the point of that clause in the license is to reinforce that some
subset of computer hardware parts are not sufficient to allow the sale of an
OEM license.  The sum of the computer parts must be enough to create a
working computer.   You know how it goes, some vendors would sell an OEM
license and ship a mouse with it as the hardware requirement of the OEM
license.

Carl

-Original Message-
From: E. Peeters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:01 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single
drive at once

Afraid I'm not going to help, but an OEM license states that a system is
the sum of:
-a CPU;
-a motherboard;
-a power supply;
-a hard drive.

Not a lawyer, but my guess is, change one of the components above and
you have a different system.

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:18 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single
drive at once

Hi everybody (Hi Dr. Nick!)...

  Scenario: One computer.  Computer has a removable hard disk drive
(like one of these: http://tinyurl.com/CRUDataPort3).  Only one spot
in the computer for the removable carrier, so only one hard disk at a
time can be used.  There will be several hard disks, each with its own
installed instance of Windows and Office.  But they will only be used
with that one host PC, and only one at a time.  (The disks contain
data we are required to keep physically separated -- by an "air gap"
-- at all times.)

  Question: Do I need a license seat for each hard disk?

  My take: Only one license per computer should be needed.  It's all
one computer.  I won't ever be able to *use* more than one seat at a
time.  When it comes to OEM licenses, the license is part of the
computer it is sold with.  If I take the disk out of the PC and put it
in a different PC, I need a license for that other PC.  If that
principle is applied uniformly, a license purchased with a computer,
used with that computer, with multiple hard drives, is okay.

  Microsoft Sales verbally insists I need a license seat for each, and
I cannot find a formal document stating otherwise.

  Does anyone have a URL or document title I can refer to that
contradicts this?

  Or are we going to have to buy several seats of Vista and Office for
this one PC?  Retail box for Vista, too, since OS Volume Licenses are
"Upgrade Only".  I'm going to end up having to spend over $4000 on
Vista and Office licenses on this one PC!

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Disgruntled Sysadmin

[Angus Scott-Fleming]

On 17 Jul 2008 at 7:54, Mike Sullivan  wrote:

> Can we just drop all of the politicians in the Pacific and start over? 
> At the very least they should all lose one months pay for every day we 
> don't have a budget.

I think the USA should require Japan, Korea, Germany, and France to take one US 
politico for each car built in their country that they want to sell here. That 
would solve two problems at once, those countries are clearly experiencing a 
shortage of hot air.

--
Angus Scott-Fleming
GeoApps, Tucson, Arizona
1-520-290-5038
+---+




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: File Copy

[Angus Scott-Fleming]

On 15 Jul 2008 at 13:27, Jeff Harris  wrote:

> I'm having a problem copying a file that is 116gb to a different server. The
> strange thing is, I did it before, but now I can't.  I have tried compressing
> the file and copying it, but when I try to uncompress it, I get an error. 
> The file is a video file that we absolutely need.  Any thoughts? 

Worst case you could use a file-splitter to break it up and copy the pieces, 
then re-assemble it at the target.

File Splitters, freeware and multi-platform: HJSplit
http://www.freebyte.com/hjsplit/

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22file+splitter%22+freeware

--
Angus Scott-Fleming
GeoApps, Tucson, Arizona
1-520-290-5038
+---+




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Screensaver

[Angus Scott-Fleming]

On 15 Jul 2008 at 13:24, Glen Johnson  wrote:

> Got a request to configure all employees screensaver to display a message of 
> the day 
> or some such security tip, info, new, whatever.
> Anyone have experience with some third party preferably freeware that might 
> do this?
> Windows 2003 domain so group policy configuration is possible.
> Mostly XP clients but a few vista now and more to come.

Trivial to do with a batch file or script during logon that changes the 
registry settings.


Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Desktop]
"ScreenSaverIsSecure"="0"
"ScreenSaveTimeOut"="300"
"ScreenSaveActive"="1"
"SCRNSAVE.EXE"="C:\\WINDOWS\\system32\\ssmarque.scr"

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Screen Saver.Marquee]
"BackgroundColor"="0 0 128"
"CharSet"="0"
"Font"="Tahoma"
"Mode"="1"
"Size"="24"
"Speed"="14"
"Text"="Shook Wuz Here"
"TextColor"="255 0 255"
"Attributes"="0"


You could even program the batch-file/script to grab a new MOTD daily from a 
library if you wanted ...


--
Angus Scott-Fleming
GeoApps, Tucson, Arizona
1-520-290-5038
+---+




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive at once

[Tim Vander Kooi]

If you are dealing with an OEM license then I would say it would probably be 
within your rights to load multiple drives with one XP license. This is because 
an OEM XP license is sold based on the BIOS of the machine it is sold with. 
I.E. - If the original hard drive dies and you have to replace it you shouldn't 
even have to re-activate XP let alone re-purchase it. You are really just 
downing a hard drive and replacing it many times over, but as long as the BIOS 
doesn't change you are technically not breaking your licensing terms. 
Ultimately, Microsoft licensing does get the last word though. On the bright 
side, if you ask 10 people at Microsoft licensing the same question you are 
almost guaranteed to get at least 5 different answers from them. So if you 
don't like the first answer you get, ask someone else.
Tim

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:18 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive at 
once

Hi everybody (Hi Dr. Nick!)...

  Scenario: One computer.  Computer has a removable hard disk drive
(like one of these: http://tinyurl.com/CRUDataPort3).  Only one spot
in the computer for the removable carrier, so only one hard disk at a
time can be used.  There will be several hard disks, each with its own
installed instance of Windows and Office.  But they will only be used
with that one host PC, and only one at a time.  (The disks contain
data we are required to keep physically separated -- by an "air gap"
-- at all times.)

  Question: Do I need a license seat for each hard disk?

  My take: Only one license per computer should be needed.  It's all
one computer.  I won't ever be able to *use* more than one seat at a
time.  When it comes to OEM licenses, the license is part of the
computer it is sold with.  If I take the disk out of the PC and put it
in a different PC, I need a license for that other PC.  If that
principle is applied uniformly, a license purchased with a computer,
used with that computer, with multiple hard drives, is okay.

  Microsoft Sales verbally insists I need a license seat for each, and
I cannot find a formal document stating otherwise.

  Does anyone have a URL or document title I can refer to that contradicts this?

  Or are we going to have to buy several seats of Vista and Office for
this one PC?  Retail box for Vista, too, since OS Volume Licenses are
"Upgrade Only".  I'm going to end up having to spend over $4000 on
Vista and Office licenses on this one PC!

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive at once

[E. Peeters]

Afraid I'm not going to help, but an OEM license states that a system is
the sum of:
-a CPU;
-a motherboard;
-a power supply;
-a hard drive.

Not a lawyer, but my guess is, change one of the components above and
you have a different system.

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:18 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single
drive at once

Hi everybody (Hi Dr. Nick!)...

  Scenario: One computer.  Computer has a removable hard disk drive
(like one of these: http://tinyurl.com/CRUDataPort3).  Only one spot
in the computer for the removable carrier, so only one hard disk at a
time can be used.  There will be several hard disks, each with its own
installed instance of Windows and Office.  But they will only be used
with that one host PC, and only one at a time.  (The disks contain
data we are required to keep physically separated -- by an "air gap"
-- at all times.)

  Question: Do I need a license seat for each hard disk?

  My take: Only one license per computer should be needed.  It's all
one computer.  I won't ever be able to *use* more than one seat at a
time.  When it comes to OEM licenses, the license is part of the
computer it is sold with.  If I take the disk out of the PC and put it
in a different PC, I need a license for that other PC.  If that
principle is applied uniformly, a license purchased with a computer,
used with that computer, with multiple hard drives, is okay.

  Microsoft Sales verbally insists I need a license seat for each, and
I cannot find a formal document stating otherwise.

  Does anyone have a URL or document title I can refer to that
contradicts this?

  Or are we going to have to buy several seats of Vista and Office for
this one PC?  Retail box for Vista, too, since OS Volume Licenses are
"Upgrade Only".  I'm going to end up having to spend over $4000 on
Vista and Office licenses on this one PC!

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Single Sign On

[Bill Lambert]

Hello all...

 

We have an extremely large customer that would like to be able to use
SSO so their users can log into Active Directory and use the same
credentials to an intranet site that is Linux based.  The application
currently uses LDAP authentication and the passwords are also stored in
the database of the application.

 

I know nothing about SSO so I thought I'd ask for help here.  I've seen
appliances that seem to be able to do this but I was wondering if there
are other ways.

 

Any links/advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

Bill Lambert

Windows System Administrator

Concuity

A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc.  

Phone  847-941-9206

Fax  847-465-9147

 

NASDAQ: TTPA

The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached
files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the
recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or
authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby
notified that you have received this communication in error and that any
review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this
message.  Thank you.

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~<>

RE: Which domain server is being used

[Ziots, Edward]

Echo %LogonServer% from the command prompt. 

Or set lo will give it to you also. 

Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
Phone: 401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: Oliver Marshall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:54 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Which domain server is being used

Hi chaps

Can anyone tell me a quick way to find out which domain server a member
server is trying to authenticate against ?

Windows 2003 all round.

Eeek

Olly

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Kim Longenbaugh]

Sorry, I was watching Laurel and Hardy moviesnot.

Yeah, I meant Stu

-Original Message-
From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:32 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


Who's Stan?  You mean Stu?

Hey Stu, can you unsub anyone who joined in the last 24 hours?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:06 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

I guessing that Stan may get a little PO'd if somebody is "farming" the
mailing lists 

-Original Message-
From: Free, Bob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


I got one too on a response in another thread, I just surmised that
someone had subscribed some dorky auto responder to the list. 

I just looked and the headers have several references to salesforce.com
"The Leader in On-Demand Customer Relationship Management"  LOL


-Original Message-
From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?

Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages
and
sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Dear Carl Houseman,   

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457:
"RE:
Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been
created
and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to
you
shortly.   

Thank you,   
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Which domain server is being used

[Oliver Marshall]

Hi chaps

Can anyone tell me a quick way to find out which domain server a member
server is trying to authenticate against ?

Windows 2003 all round.

Eeek

Olly

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Carl Houseman]

Who's Stan?  You mean Stu?

Hey Stu, can you unsub anyone who joined in the last 24 hours?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:06 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

I guessing that Stan may get a little PO'd if somebody is "farming" the
mailing lists 

-Original Message-
From: Free, Bob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


I got one too on a response in another thread, I just surmised that
someone had subscribed some dorky auto responder to the list. 

I just looked and the headers have several references to salesforce.com
"The Leader in On-Demand Customer Relationship Management"  LOL


-Original Message-
From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?

Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages
and
sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Dear Carl Houseman,   

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457:
"RE:
Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been
created
and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to
you
shortly.   

Thank you,   
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

MSFT licensing: Multiple hard disks, single computer, single drive at once

[Ben Scott]

Hi everybody (Hi Dr. Nick!)...

  Scenario: One computer.  Computer has a removable hard disk drive
(like one of these: http://tinyurl.com/CRUDataPort3).  Only one spot
in the computer for the removable carrier, so only one hard disk at a
time can be used.  There will be several hard disks, each with its own
installed instance of Windows and Office.  But they will only be used
with that one host PC, and only one at a time.  (The disks contain
data we are required to keep physically separated -- by an "air gap"
-- at all times.)

  Question: Do I need a license seat for each hard disk?

  My take: Only one license per computer should be needed.  It's all
one computer.  I won't ever be able to *use* more than one seat at a
time.  When it comes to OEM licenses, the license is part of the
computer it is sold with.  If I take the disk out of the PC and put it
in a different PC, I need a license for that other PC.  If that
principle is applied uniformly, a license purchased with a computer,
used with that computer, with multiple hard drives, is okay.

  Microsoft Sales verbally insists I need a license seat for each, and
I cannot find a formal document stating otherwise.

  Does anyone have a URL or document title I can refer to that contradicts this?

  Or are we going to have to buy several seats of Vista and Office for
this one PC?  Retail box for Vista, too, since OS Volume Licenses are
"Upgrade Only".  I'm going to end up having to spend over $4000 on
Vista and Office licenses on this one PC!

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[Kim Longenbaugh]

Proper = pervert

 



From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:10 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

LOL Bostonians and Proper, I hardly, think so... But maybe well let
Larry slide, just this once ":-) 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:24 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

+1 here in Oregon too

 

From: Kent, Larry CTR USA IMCOM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:21 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

Z

 

cloogy?  At first I thought this was Rhode Island slang, but it is
listed in the Urban dictionary. We proper Bostonians spell it 'kludgey'
:)

 

- Larry

 



From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

Funny part is I found the VMware Update Manager for the patches to be
sum what cloogy at best, I want all my VM's to be uniform on patches,
and it doesn't seem, to know what patches or arent applied to the ESX
guests already. So its Still Shavlik to the rescue. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: James Rankin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[Ziots, Edward]

LOL Bostonians and Proper, I hardly, think so... But maybe well let
Larry slide, just this once ":-) 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:24 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

+1 here in Oregon too

 

From: Kent, Larry CTR USA IMCOM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:21 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

Z

 

cloogy?  At first I thought this was Rhode Island slang, but it is
listed in the Urban dictionary. We proper Bostonians spell it 'kludgey'
:)

 

- Larry

 



From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

Funny part is I found the VMware Update Manager for the patches to be
sum what cloogy at best, I want all my VM's to be uniform on patches,
and it doesn't seem, to know what patches or arent applied to the ESX
guests already. So its Still Shavlik to the rescue. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: James Rankin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: SSL cert question

[Simon Butler]

You must have made the changes to get the self generated certificate accepted 
by the clients.
Even a self generated certificate will expire one day and that will cause the 
feature to fail.
Personally speaking, I don't bother with self generated certificates for RPC 
over HTTPS. For the hassle when they expire and generally getting them to work 
for the sake of saving US$25/year it isn't worth it.

Simon.



--
Simon Butler
MVP: Exchange, MCSE
Amset IT Solutions Ltd.

e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
w: www.amset.co.uk
w: www.amset.info

Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with Windows Mobile 5.0?
http://CertificatesForExchange.com/ for 
certificates from just $23.99.
Need a domain for your certificate? 
http://DomainsForExchange.net/


From: Gavin Wilby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17 July 2008 19:19
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SSL cert question

"or RPC over HTTPS then those features will fail"

Are you entirly sure about that - I only ask cos I have two sbs sites that use 
RPC over HTTPS in Outlook and they have *no* registered certs at all, and the 
connection still works.

Or is it more of a case of a valid cert expiring that causes the failure.

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Simon Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you are using Exchange 2003 and are using Exchange ActiveSync or RPC over 
HTTPS then those features will fail completely as they cannot cope with the 
certificate prompt.
If the certificate is being used to secure SMTP/POP3/IMAP connections then 
those will also fail, particularly if it is being used to secure incoming email 
on TLS/SMTPS.

Basically anything that uses SSL transparently will stop working.

Simon.



--
Simon Butler
MVP: Exchange, MCSE
Amset IT Solutions Ltd.

e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
w: www.amset.co.uk
w: www.amset.info

Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with Windows Mobile 5.0?
http://CertificatesForExchange.com/ for 
certificates from just $23.99.
Need a domain for your certificate? 
http://DomainsForExchange.net/


-Original Message-
From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 16 July 2008 18:40
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SSL cert question

That's pretty much exactly my question.  We have one that expires next week, 
and since the state doesn't have a budget yet, I'm not allowed to renew it, or 
even pay $15.00 out of my own pocket to get a GoDaddy cert.  So, my boss is 
asking me if there are security concerns with users accessing through an 
expired cert, and I just want to be sure one way or the other before giving my 
"certified" answer...

Joe Heaton
-Original Message-
From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SSL cert question

If you're talking about a cert for a web site, clients requesting it will be
notified that the cert is expired and warned that there could be problems
with it.  To my knowledge, if they accept the risk of accepting an expired
cert, the encryption still takes place, same as if they accept a cert from a
non-globally recognized CA.

 - Andy O.

From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 12:28 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: SSL cert question

If you have an SSL cert, and it expires, what, if any, functionality is
lost?

Joe Heaton
AISA
Employment Training Panel
1100 J Street, 4th Floor
Sacramento, CA  95814
(916) 327-5276
[EMAIL PROTECTED]





~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1555 - Release Date: 7/16/2008 6:43 
AM

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Kim Longenbaugh]

I guessing that Stan may get a little PO'd if somebody is "farming" the
mailing lists 

-Original Message-
From: Free, Bob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


I got one too on a response in another thread, I just surmised that
someone had subscribed some dorky auto responder to the list. 

I just looked and the headers have several references to salesforce.com
"The Leader in On-Demand Customer Relationship Management"  LOL


-Original Message-
From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?

Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages
and
sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Dear Carl Houseman,   

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457:
"RE:
Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been
created
and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to
you
shortly.   

Thank you,   
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Rod Trent]

Google!



-Original Message-
From: Free, Bob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

I got one too on a response in another thread, I just surmised that
someone had subscribed some dorky auto responder to the list. 

I just looked and the headers have several references to salesforce.com
"The Leader in On-Demand Customer Relationship Management"  LOL


-Original Message-
From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?

Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages
and
sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Dear Carl Houseman,   

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457:
"RE:
Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been
created
and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to
you
shortly.   

Thank you,   
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Free, Bob]

I got one too on a response in another thread, I just surmised that
someone had subscribed some dorky auto responder to the list. 

I just looked and the headers have several references to salesforce.com
"The Leader in On-Demand Customer Relationship Management"  LOL


-Original Message-
From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: ???: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for
standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?

Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages
and
sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Dear Carl Houseman,   

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457:
"RE:
Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been
created
and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to
you
shortly.   

Thank you,   
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: ???: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Jon Harris]

Look at the thread on Forced Computer Naming Convention.

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  I think it was Bob Free that menitioned that he had just gotten something
> similar in another thread today.  I guess there is a lurker wanting to sell
> stuff to us.
>
> Jon
>
>   On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?
>>
>> Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages and
>> sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?
>>
>> Carl
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
>> purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref
>>
>> Dear Carl Houseman,
>>
>> Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457: "RE:
>> Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been created
>> and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to you
>> shortly.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Customer Service Team  Web Stores America
>>
>> ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref
>>
>>
>> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
>> ~   ~
>>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: ???: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Jon Harris]

I think it was Bob Free that menitioned that he had just gotten something
similar in another thread today.  I guess there is a lurker wanting to sell
stuff to us.

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?
>
> Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages and
> sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?
>
> Carl
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
> purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref
>
> Dear Carl Houseman,
>
> Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457: "RE:
> Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been created
> and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to you
> shortly.
>
> Thank you,
> Customer Service Team  Web Stores America
>
> ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

???: Case # 000xxxxx: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

[Carl Houseman]

Can anyone tell me why or how I received this?

Is Google doing now taking action based on subject/content of messages and
sharing our E-mail with its partners or clients?

Carl

-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Case # 000x: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone
purchase and use? ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref

Dear Carl Houseman,   

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023457: "RE:
Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?" has been created
and a Web Stores America Customer Service Team member will respond to you
shortly.   

Thank you,   
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

ref:00D57Vhx.50054w2Ws:ref


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: SSL cert question

[Steven Peck]

Your support phone calls will go up significantly.

You may want to go through your authentication logs to identify your
regular users and craft an email with pictures because IE7 has a big
blank "don't go here" type screen.  You could circle the appropriate
places with red and explain what they mean and why you can ignore them
for this one site.

Steven

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Joe Heaton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, so things that will actually break, as this cert is on my exchange
> server, used to access OWA.  We also use it for Activesync with our
> mobiles:
>
> 1)  Automation in accessing OWA through browser, but encryption will
> still happen.
>
> 2)  Activesync will break, as it cannot cope without automation.  Can I
> temporarily get by this by unchecking the SSL box within Activesync
> settings on the mobile devices?
>
> Joe Heaton
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:34 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: SSL cert question
>
> If you are using Exchange 2003 and are using Exchange ActiveSync or RPC
> over HTTPS then those features will fail completely as they cannot cope
> with the certificate prompt.
> If the certificate is being used to secure SMTP/POP3/IMAP connections
> then those will also fail, particularly if it is being used to secure
> incoming email on TLS/SMTPS.
>
> Basically anything that uses SSL transparently will stop working.
>
> Simon.
>
>
>
> --
> Simon Butler
> MVP: Exchange, MCSE
> Amset IT Solutions Ltd.
>
> e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> w: www.amset.co.uk
> w: www.amset.info
>
> Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with Windows Mobile
> 5.0?
> http://CertificatesForExchange.com/ for certificates from just $23.99.
> Need a domain for your certificate? http://DomainsForExchange.net/
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 16 July 2008 18:40
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: SSL cert question
>
> That's pretty much exactly my question.  We have one that expires next
> week, and since the state doesn't have a budget yet, I'm not allowed to
> renew it, or even pay $15.00 out of my own pocket to get a GoDaddy cert.
> So, my boss is asking me if there are security concerns with users
> accessing through an expired cert, and I just want to be sure one way or
> the other before giving my "certified" answer...
>
> Joe Heaton
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:33 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: SSL cert question
>
> If you're talking about a cert for a web site, clients requesting it
> will be
> notified that the cert is expired and warned that there could be
> problems
> with it.  To my knowledge, if they accept the risk of accepting an
> expired
> cert, the encryption still takes place, same as if they accept a cert
> from a
> non-globally recognized CA.
>
>  - Andy O.
> 
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 12:28 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: SSL cert question
>
> If you have an SSL cert, and it expires, what, if any, functionality is
> lost?
>
> Joe Heaton
> AISA
> Employment Training Panel
> 1100 J Street, 4th Floor
> Sacramento, CA  95814
> (916) 327-5276
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1555 - Release Date:
> 7/16/2008 6:43 AM
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1555 - Release Date:
> 7/16/2008 6:43 AM
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: SSL cert question

[Gavin Wilby]

"or RPC over HTTPS then those features will fail"

Are you entirly sure about that - I only ask cos I have two sbs sites that
use RPC over HTTPS in Outlook and they have *no* registered certs at all,
and the connection still works.

Or is it more of a case of a valid cert expiring that causes the failure.

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Simon Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> If you are using Exchange 2003 and are using Exchange ActiveSync or RPC
> over HTTPS then those features will fail completely as they cannot cope with
> the certificate prompt.
> If the certificate is being used to secure SMTP/POP3/IMAP connections then
> those will also fail, particularly if it is being used to secure incoming
> email on TLS/SMTPS.
>
> Basically anything that uses SSL transparently will stop working.
>
> Simon.
>
>
>
> --
> Simon Butler
> MVP: Exchange, MCSE
> Amset IT Solutions Ltd.
>
> e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> w: www.amset.co.uk
> w: www.amset.info
>
> Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with Windows Mobile 5.0?
> http://CertificatesForExchange.com/ for 
> certificates from just $23.99.
> Need a domain for your certificate? 
> http://DomainsForExchange.net/
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  Sent: 16 July 2008 18:40
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: SSL cert question
>
> That's pretty much exactly my question.  We have one that expires next
> week, and since the state doesn't have a budget yet, I'm not allowed to
> renew it, or even pay $15.00 out of my own pocket to get a GoDaddy cert.
>  So, my boss is asking me if there are security concerns with users
> accessing through an expired cert, and I just want to be sure one way or the
> other before giving my "certified" answer...
>
> Joe Heaton
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:33 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: SSL cert question
>
> If you're talking about a cert for a web site, clients requesting it will
> be
> notified that the cert is expired and warned that there could be problems
> with it.  To my knowledge, if they accept the risk of accepting an expired
> cert, the encryption still takes place, same as if they accept a cert from
> a
> non-globally recognized CA.
>
>  - Andy O.
> 
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 12:28 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: SSL cert question
>
> If you have an SSL cert, and it expires, what, if any, functionality is
> lost?
>
> Joe Heaton
> AISA
> Employment Training Panel
> 1100 J Street, 4th Floor
> Sacramento, CA  95814
> (916) 327-5276
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1555 - Release Date: 7/16/2008
> 6:43 AM
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Jon Harris]

Here is the FAQ for Hyper-V if it is of any use to you.

https://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/hyperv-faq.aspx

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  There will be?  Now that would be very nice and would make serveral
> things I am working on doable where now they are not.
>
> Jon
>
>  On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Greg Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>>  The $28.00 version is not for sale yet. It should be released this
>> quarter.
>>
>> But yes, there will be a $28.00 version that only runs Hyper-V, it's just
>> not out yet.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:51 AM
>> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>> *Subject:* RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?
>>
>>
>>
>> So in reality, Hyper-V isn't competition for VMware-ESX unless you were
>> buying Windows 2008 anyway?
>>
>>
>>
>> All that talk about $28 for unbundled Hyper-Vwas just to grab headlines,
>> there's nothing you can get from MS for $28 that you could use to virtualize
>> on bare metal a bunch of 2003 servers?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Carl
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:41 PM
>> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>> *Subject:* Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?
>>
>>
>>
>> Here is the site with the purchasing information.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/pricing.aspx
>>
>>
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Steve Ens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/virtualization-consolidation.aspx
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about
>> Hyper-V.   Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a
>> standalone product.  I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any
>> Windows 2008 server license required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if
>> True?
>>
>>
>>
>> Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD
>> and run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the
>> hardware required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into
>> Hyper-V, but nothing talking about migrating the other way.
>>
>>
>>
>> The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that
>> runs them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware
>> to run a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the
>> single-point-of-failure.   I know that may be more trouble than it's worth,
>> probably easier and possibly cheaper to buy a second server identical to the
>> first, but just wondering if the idea is even workable.
>>
>>
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> Carl
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Rant: Incorrect quotes from vendors

[Jonathan Link]

I just gave up on our standard rep and have decided to go with our Premier
Rep available through our association.
I asked him a question about a encrypted usb memory keys, and I had 4
minutes of silence from him, no acknowledgement of my question, and then
continued on as if I hadn't asked anything.
When he does figure out what I am trying to tell him, he gets the quotes
wrong.

He's done.

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Sam Cayze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  Ok, just logged in to Dell to check my recent orders... YIKES
>
> 5 Laptops
>
> 2 Desktops
>
> The order was supposed to look like:
>
> 10 Laptops
>
> 1 Desktop!
>
>
>
> She will have some 'splaining to do!
>
>
>
> *From:* Jim Majorowicz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Monday, July 14, 2008 12:06 PM
>
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Rant: Incorrect quotes from vendors
>
>
>
> This was basically what I was getting at.  Plus, I've noticed that the good
> reps at Dell seem to know who the other good reps are…
>
>
>
> *From:* Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Monday, July 14, 2008 8:38 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Rant: Incorrect quotes from vendors
>
>
>
> Dell reps don't have to be a revolving door. If you get one that is bad,
> let their manager know (they should have their manager's information in the
> signature of their email) and inform them that you want a new rep. If you
> have a great one by all means tell their manager (and possibly even mention
> the fact that your continued business with Dell hinges on them remaining
> your rep). We have had the same rep with Dell for over 3 years now, after 2
> years of REALLY bad reps, and he is awesome. It does require you to be
> somewhat proactive in the process though, if you sit back and wait for a
> good rep to fall in your lap then you will indeed end up on the "bad rep
> merry-go-round", but that is true of any vendor.
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> *From:* Tom Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Sunday, July 13, 2008 8:38 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Rant: Incorrect quotes from vendors
>
>
>
> I rarely have that problem with Dell.  But then again I save quotes I've
> used in the past and send them along with a re-quote and tell them to
> reference the attached quote.
>
>
>
> I've been trying to get some HP pricing for workstations, and here I work
> through a local reseller for a decent discount.  Last quote I had for a PC
> included 512 MB of memory for Windows Vista business edition.  Hellooo?
> We had a good laugh about that one.
>
>
>
> I agree that sales reps at Dell are a revolving door.  I think my agency
> has been through 6 or so in the last four years.  Must be a crappy
> position.  Hence my sending the quote for reference.  I think my current
> Dell rep is named Shemp.  The previous were Moe, Larry and Curley.
>
>
>
> Tom
>
> >>> "Bob Fronk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 7/13/2008 2:07 PM >>>
>
> You must have the same Dell rep I have !
>
>
>
> Bob Fronk
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Friday, July 11, 2008 4:40 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* OT: Rant: Incorrect quotes from vendors
>
>
>
> 
>
> Sorry just wanted to vent.
>
> For some reason it seems that none of the vendors we deal with can get a
> quote correct. Not once, never. We primarily deal with Dell, both US and
> Canada. We also use HP and have multiple lease vendors. None of them ever
> get a  quote right the first time. For example if I send them something
> like this:
>
> Please give me a quote for (2)  PowerEdge 1950 servers with the following:
>
>
>
> (2) Dual Core 3.0GHz Xeon Processors
> 8GB RAM
> (2) 146GB Hard drives (RAID 1)
> DRAC 5/I card
> (2) Emulex LPe11002-E HBA adapters (A1663181)
> Gold Support
> NetIQ AppManager
> NetIQ AppManager Maintenance
> PowerPath licenses
> Windows 2003 Server Enterprise
>
> I will get back a quote that might have 4G RAM instead of 8. Or no DRAC
> card, or have the wrong quantity of HBA cards. Every time it happens we
> bring it to the attention of our account executive and they swear they will
> resolve the issue. They don't. Then 2 months later the account executive is
> replaced or has moved on and a new one comes on board, or the person that
> generates the quotes leaves the company. I would just love to have a simple
> quote done correctly the first time.
>
> 
>
> Chris Bodnar
>
> Sr. Windows Systems Engineer
>
> Swiftwater, PA
>
> X3522
>
> This communication, including any attachments, is intended solely for the
> use of the addressee and may contain information which is privileged,
> confidential, exempt from disclosure under applicable law or subject to
> copyright. If you are not an intended recipient, any use, disclosure,
> distribution, reproduction, review or copying is unauthorized and may be
> unlawful. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the
> sender immediately. 

Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Jon Harris]

There will be?  Now that would be very nice and would make serveral things I
am working on doable where now they are not.

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Greg Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  The $28.00 version is not for sale yet. It should be released this
> quarter.
>
> But yes, there will be a $28.00 version that only runs Hyper-V, it's just
> not out yet.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:51 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?
>
>
>
> So in reality, Hyper-V isn't competition for VMware-ESX unless you were
> buying Windows 2008 anyway?
>
>
>
> All that talk about $28 for unbundled Hyper-Vwas just to grab headlines,
> there's nothing you can get from MS for $28 that you could use to virtualize
> on bare metal a bunch of 2003 servers?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carl
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:41 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?
>
>
>
> Here is the site with the purchasing information.
>
>
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/pricing.aspx
>
>
>
> Jon
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Steve Ens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/virtualization-consolidation.aspx
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about
> Hyper-V.   Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a
> standalone product.  I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any
> Windows 2008 server license required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if
> True?
>
>
>
> Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD
> and run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the
> hardware required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into
> Hyper-V, but nothing talking about migrating the other way.
>
>
>
> The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that
> runs them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware
> to run a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the
> single-point-of-failure.   I know that may be more trouble than it's worth,
> probably easier and possibly cheaper to buy a second server identical to the
> first, but just wondering if the idea is even workable.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Carl
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Jon Harris]

Not from what I have seen.  That said Hyper-V is very nice to work on and
since the drives were interchangable it was better and cheaper than purchase
of the hardware + ESX for me.

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  So in reality, Hyper-V isn't competition for VMware-ESX unless you were
> buying Windows 2008 anyway?
>
>
>
> All that talk about $28 for unbundled Hyper-Vwas just to grab headlines,
> there's nothing you can get from MS for $28 that you could use to virtualize
> on bare metal a bunch of 2003 servers?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carl
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:41 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?
>
>
>
> Here is the site with the purchasing information.
>
>
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/pricing.aspx
>
>
>
> Jon
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Steve Ens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/virtualization-consolidation.aspx
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about
> Hyper-V.   Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a
> standalone product.  I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any
> Windows 2008 server license required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if
> True?
>
>
>
> Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD
> and run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the
> hardware required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into
> Hyper-V, but nothing talking about migrating the other way.
>
>
>
> The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that
> runs them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware
> to run a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the
> single-point-of-failure.   I know that may be more trouble than it's worth,
> probably easier and possibly cheaper to buy a second server identical to the
> first, but just wondering if the idea is even workable.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Carl
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Greg Olson]

The $28.00 version is not for sale yet. It should be released this quarter.
But yes, there will be a $28.00 version that only runs Hyper-V, it's just not 
out yet.


From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:51 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

So in reality, Hyper-V isn't competition for VMware-ESX unless you were buying 
Windows 2008 anyway?

All that talk about $28 for unbundled Hyper-Vwas just to grab headlines, 
there's nothing you can get from MS for $28 that you could use to virtualize on 
bare metal a bunch of 2003 servers?

Thanks,
Carl


From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:41 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

Here is the site with the purchasing information.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/pricing.aspx

Jon
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Steve Ens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/virtualization-consolidation.aspx

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> wrote:

I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about Hyper-V.   
Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a standalone product.  
I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any Windows 2008 server license 
required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if True?



Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD and 
run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the hardware 
required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into Hyper-V, but 
nothing talking about migrating the other way.



The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that runs 
them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware to run 
a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the single-point-of-failure.   I 
know that may be more trouble than it's worth, probably easier and possibly 
cheaper to buy a second server identical to the first, but just wondering if 
the idea is even workable.



thanks,

Carl







~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Carl Houseman]

So in reality, Hyper-V isn't competition for VMware-ESX unless you were
buying Windows 2008 anyway?

 

All that talk about $28 for unbundled Hyper-Vwas just to grab headlines,
there's nothing you can get from MS for $28 that you could use to virtualize
on bare metal a bunch of 2003 servers?

 

Thanks,

Carl

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:41 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

 

Here is the site with the purchasing information.

 

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/pricing.aspx

 

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Steve Ens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/virtualization-consolidatio
n.aspx 

 

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about Hyper-V.
Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a standalone
product.  I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any Windows 2008
server license required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if True?

 

Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD
and run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the
hardware required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into
Hyper-V, but nothing talking about migrating the other way.

 

The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that runs
them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware to
run a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the
single-point-of-failure.   I know that may be more trouble than it's worth,
probably easier and possibly cheaper to buy a second server identical to the
first, but just wondering if the idea is even workable.

 

thanks,

Carl

 

 

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: WSUS Slowness

[Carl Houseman]

Hmm, I just noticed the grade of hardware you're talking about.  Hard to
believe you considered it acceptable before.  Taskmgr.exe is your friend,
check the memory load and CPU utilization while waiting for WSUS to do
things, and also the CPU load when not asking WSUS to do things.  That will
reveal all.

-Original Message-
From: James Kerr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:52 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: WSUS Slowness

No it has a RAID controller.


- Original Message - 
From: "Carl Houseman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "NT System Admin Issues" 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: WSUS Slowness


> Is there a directly connected drive which contains the AD database 
> (sysvol)?
>
> Directly connected = SCSI, SAS, SATA, IDE, withOUT any RAID controller.
>
> If so the write caches on those directly connected drives are disabled 
> when
> it's a DC.   If you want to call that "added overhead of having AD", feel
> free.
>
> Carl
>
> -Original Message-
> From: James Kerr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:50 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: WSUS Slowness
>
> I have a new install of WSUS on the server that had it before. I wiped the
> drive and reinstalled everything. This time round I am finding that WSUS 
> is
> running very slow listing and approving updates and just very slow in
> general. The only difference is that now the machine is a DC. I saw some
> info about running a SQL script that is supposed to speed it up but its 
> very
>
> dated. Anyone else have this problem before?
>
> Full disclosure: This server is old. P3 1.4GHz w/ 768MB but it didnt run
> this slow before. Maybe its the added overhead of having AD now?
>
> James



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Jon Harris]

Here is the site with the purchasing information.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/pricing.aspx

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Steve Ens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/virtualization-consolidation.aspx
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>>  I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about
>> Hyper-V.   Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a
>> standalone product.  I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any
>> Windows 2008 server license required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if
>> True?
>>
>>
>>
>> Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD
>> and run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the
>> hardware required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into
>> Hyper-V, but nothing talking about migrating the other way.
>>
>>
>>
>> The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that
>> runs them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware
>> to run a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the
>> single-point-of-failure.   I know that may be more trouble than it's worth,
>> probably easier and possibly cheaper to buy a second server identical to the
>> first, but just wondering if the idea is even workable.
>>
>>
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> Carl
>>
>>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Steve Ens]

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/virtualization-consolidation.aspx

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>  I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about
> Hyper-V.   Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a
> standalone product.  I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any
> Windows 2008 server license required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if
> True?
>
>
>
> Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD
> and run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the
> hardware required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into
> Hyper-V, but nothing talking about migrating the other way.
>
>
>
> The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that
> runs them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware
> to run a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the
> single-point-of-failure.   I know that may be more trouble than it's worth,
> probably easier and possibly cheaper to buy a second server identical to the
> first, but just wondering if the idea is even workable.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Carl
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Steve Ens]

Hyper V runs on Windows Server 2008...on a gui based install or on Core.
You can buy Win2K8 without Hyper V, but I don't think it is worth it.  With
enterprise you get four free virtual licenses.  At least this is how I have
it running here.
I think (don't quote me) you can only migrate to hyper v from virtual
server, not the other way around.

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>  I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about
> Hyper-V.   Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a
> standalone product.  I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any
> Windows 2008 server license required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if
> True?
>
>
>
> Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD
> and run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the
> hardware required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into
> Hyper-V, but nothing talking about migrating the other way.
>
>
>
> The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that
> runs them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware
> to run a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the
> single-point-of-failure.   I know that may be more trouble than it's worth,
> probably easier and possibly cheaper to buy a second server identical to the
> first, but just wondering if the idea is even workable.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Carl
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Jon Harris]

The drives will mount under Virtual server but they will not load under
Virtual Server.  You can do the opposite as well take .VHD's from Virtual
server and mount them under Hyper-V.

You would still have the requirements of the needed hardware to run Hyper-V
but it was my impression that you can purchase Server 2008 either with or
without Hyper-V.  Not the other way around I will look for the documents and
send them later.

Taking a Virtual Server machine and making it run on Hyper-V is much easier
than taking a Hyper-V and making it run on Virtual Server.

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Carl Houseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about
> Hyper-V.   Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a
> standalone product.  I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any
> Windows 2008 server license required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if
> True?
>
>
>
> Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD
> and run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the
> hardware required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into
> Hyper-V, but nothing talking about migrating the other way.
>
>
>
> The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that
> runs them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware
> to run a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the
> single-point-of-failure.   I know that may be more trouble than it's worth,
> probably easier and possibly cheaper to buy a second server identical to the
> first, but just wondering if the idea is even workable.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Carl
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Hyper-V RTM - available for standalone purchase and use?

[Carl Houseman]

I'm getting conflicting information trying to find out more about Hyper-V.
Some talk suggests that it is or will be purchasable as a standalone
product.  I.e. you can buy, install, and use it without any Windows 2008
server license required.   True/False?  Supporting URLs if True?

 

Secondly, I'm wondering if a Hyper-V virtual server can be taken as a .VHD
and run as a guest under Virtual Server on a machine that doesn't have the
hardware required for Hyper-V.  I see talk about migrating .vhd's into
Hyper-V, but nothing talking about migrating the other way.

 

The goal is to take a bunch of non-vritual servers, buy one server that runs
them all virtually, and then the former servers become standby hardware to
run a .vhd in the event of the untimely demise of the
single-point-of-failure.   I know that may be more trouble than it's worth,
probably easier and possibly cheaper to buy a second server identical to the
first, but just wondering if the idea is even workable.

 

thanks,

Carl


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Forced Computer Naming Convention

[Don Guyer]

Bob,

I appreciate your earlier response.

*unplugging phone now*

:)

Don Guyer
Systems Engineer
Information Services Department
Prudential Fox Roach/ Trident
431 W. Lancaster Avenue
Devon, PA 19333
Ph: (610) 993-3299
Fax: (610) 650-5306
www.prufoxroach.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Free, Bob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:39 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Forced Computer Naming Convention

Don-

Looks like these guys want to help...they me sent this responseLOL

I'll give them your number when they call :-)

--
-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:09 AM
To: Free, Bob
Subject: Case # 00023358: RE: Forced Computer Naming Convention 
ref:00D57Vhx.50054w29g:ref

Dear Free, Bob,   

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023358: "RE: 
Forced Computer Naming Convention" has been created and a Web Stores America 
Customer Service Team member will respond to you shortly.   

Thank you,   
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

---

-Original Message-
From: Free, Bob 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:08 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Forced Computer Naming Convention

Not possible via GPO. 3 solutions come to mind, you can either roll your own 
provisioning system that enforces your rules and require the techs to use it, 
pre-create the accounts centrally with compliant names and just let them join 
them or buy a 3rd party solution that has logic/rules baked in like what Quest 
calls Business Rules in their Active Roles product.

From: Don Guyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:09 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Forced Computer Naming Convention

Good Morning,

    The field techs have not been diligent with sticking to a 
systematic naming convention in the past. Is it possible to somehow force a 
naming convention onto computers joining the domain, using a GPO or something 
along those lines? We would like to force the name to begin with the regional 
location such as "phila-test-01".

Thanks!


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed. It may contain information protected by  
state and federal privacy and intellectual property laws. 
If you have received this email in error please 
notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail from 
your system. If you are not the named addressee you should 
not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail, and you are 
notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any 
action in reliance on the contents of this information is
strictly prohibited. 




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: WSUS Slowness

[James Kerr]

No it has a RAID controller.


- Original Message - 
From: "Carl Houseman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "NT System Admin Issues" 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: WSUS Slowness


Is there a directly connected drive which contains the AD database 
(sysvol)?


Directly connected = SCSI, SAS, SATA, IDE, withOUT any RAID controller.

If so the write caches on those directly connected drives are disabled 
when

it's a DC.   If you want to call that "added overhead of having AD", feel
free.

Carl

-Original Message-
From: James Kerr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:50 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: WSUS Slowness

I have a new install of WSUS on the server that had it before. I wiped the
drive and reinstalled everything. This time round I am finding that WSUS 
is

running very slow listing and approving updates and just very slow in
general. The only difference is that now the machine is a DC. I saw some
info about running a SQL script that is supposed to speed it up but its 
very


dated. Anyone else have this problem before?

Full disclosure: This server is old. P3 1.4GHz w/ 768MB but it didnt run
this slow before. Maybe its the added overhead of having AD now?

James



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~ 



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: WSUS Slowness

[Carl Houseman]

Is there a directly connected drive which contains the AD database (sysvol)?

Directly connected = SCSI, SAS, SATA, IDE, withOUT any RAID controller.

If so the write caches on those directly connected drives are disabled when
it's a DC.   If you want to call that "added overhead of having AD", feel
free.

Carl

-Original Message-
From: James Kerr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:50 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: WSUS Slowness

I have a new install of WSUS on the server that had it before. I wiped the 
drive and reinstalled everything. This time round I am finding that WSUS is 
running very slow listing and approving updates and just very slow in 
general. The only difference is that now the machine is a DC. I saw some 
info about running a SQL script that is supposed to speed it up but its very

dated. Anyone else have this problem before?

Full disclosure: This server is old. P3 1.4GHz w/ 768MB but it didnt run 
this slow before. Maybe its the added overhead of having AD now?

James 



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Forced Computer Naming Convention

[Free, Bob]

Don-

Looks like these guys want to help...they me sent this responseLOL

I'll give them your number when they call :-)

--
-Original Message-
From: Web Stores America [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:09 AM
To: Free, Bob
Subject: Case # 00023358: RE: Forced Computer Naming Convention 
ref:00D57Vhx.50054w29g:ref

Dear Free, Bob,   

Thank you for submitting your question to us online. Case #00023358: "RE: 
Forced Computer Naming Convention" has been created and a Web Stores America 
Customer Service Team member will respond to you shortly.   

Thank you,   
Customer Service Team  Web Stores America

---

-Original Message-
From: Free, Bob 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:08 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Forced Computer Naming Convention

Not possible via GPO. 3 solutions come to mind, you can either roll your own 
provisioning system that enforces your rules and require the techs to use it, 
pre-create the accounts centrally with compliant names and just let them join 
them or buy a 3rd party solution that has logic/rules baked in like what Quest 
calls Business Rules in their Active Roles product.

From: Don Guyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:09 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Forced Computer Naming Convention

Good Morning,

    The field techs have not been diligent with sticking to a 
systematic naming convention in the past. Is it possible to somehow force a 
naming convention onto computers joining the domain, using a GPO or something 
along those lines? We would like to force the name to begin with the regional 
location such as "phila-test-01".

Thanks!


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Increase in Viruses

[Stefan Jafs]

Yes, bl.spamcop.net and cbl.abuseat.org

They deleted 215,440 messages the last 30 days.

I have about 200 users.

 

__
Stefan Jafs

 

From: Bob Fronk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:33
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Increase in Viruses

 

Do you use an RBL?  

 

I am not seeing much virus activity at all from Ninja, but I have a
Barracuda in front of Exchange.  Not seeing much  virus activity on the
'cuda either, but I think the RBLs catch most of them and block it
before processing.

 

Bob Fronk

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:02 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Increase in Viruses

 

I don't like this trend, this is what Ninja has found: 

 

April = 0

May = 1

June = 65

July MTD = 213

 

They are: HTML/Bankphish.HY and JA

 

Anyone else seen this kind of increase?

 

__
Stefan Jafs 

 

This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely
for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you
should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or
opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not
represent those of Amico Corporation . Warning: Although precautions
have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the
company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise
from the use of this email or attachments.

 

 

 

 



This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico 
Corpoartion company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure 
no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility 
for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Increase in Viruses

[David L Herrick]

Sadly - yes

 

From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:02 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Increase in Viruses

 

I don't like this trend, this is what Ninja has found: 

 

April = 0

May = 1

June = 65

July MTD = 213

 

They are: HTML/Bankphish.HY and JA

 

Anyone else seen this kind of increase?

 

__
Stefan Jafs 

 

This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely
for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you
should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or
opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not
represent those of Amico Corporation . Warning: Although precautions
have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the
company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise
from the use of this email or attachments.

 

 



This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Names in the 
News company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no 
viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for 
any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Increase in Viruses

[Bob Fronk]

Do you use an RBL?  

 

I am not seeing much virus activity at all from Ninja, but I have a
Barracuda in front of Exchange.  Not seeing much  virus activity on the
'cuda either, but I think the RBLs catch most of them and block it
before processing.

 

Bob Fronk

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:02 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Increase in Viruses

 

I don't like this trend, this is what Ninja has found: 

 

April = 0

May = 1

June = 65

July MTD = 213

 

They are: HTML/Bankphish.HY and JA

 

Anyone else seen this kind of increase?

 

__
Stefan Jafs 

 

This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely
for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you
should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or
opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not
represent those of Amico Corporation . Warning: Although precautions
have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the
company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise
from the use of this email or attachments.

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

[Krishna Reddy]

I just saw him at Radio City Music Hall.  As funny as ever. 


Krishna Reddy
IT Manager
Nucomm, Inc.


-Original Message-
From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:12 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

Death...oooh...cake, cake.

Ah ah, you said death first...oh, alright.


I was waiting for someone to quote that!

 - Andy O.

>-Original Message-
>From: Krishna Reddy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:56 AM
>To: NT System Admin Issues
>Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?
>
>Cake or death?


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~





The information contained in this email and attachments to this email are the 
proprietary and confidential property 
of Nucomm, Inc.  The information is provided in strict confidence and shall not 
be reproduced, copied, or
used (partially or wholly) in any manner without prior, express written 
authorization of Nucomm, Inc.


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: My First 2008 Server

[Tim Vander Kooi]

Be aware that the kb article that you referenced deals with Server 2000 and 
Server 2003, NOT Server 2008 (check the Applies To section at the bottom). The 
DC role is one of the built in adds for Hyper-V so I would think that Microsoft 
would have a hard time selling "Don't put DC's on Hyper-V" when they "baked it 
in" in the first place.
Tim

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: My First 2008 Server

Per MS it's OK as long as they don't hold any FSMO roles.

We recommend that you locate critical server roles on domain controllers that 
are installed directly on physical hardware. Critical server roles include the 
following:
* Global catalog servers
* Domain Name System (DNS) servers
* Operations master roles, also known as flexible single master operations 
(FSMO)

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888794

Dave Lum  - Systems Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - (971)-222-1025
"..remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the 
back of the tiger ended up inside"  - JFK

From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 7:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: My First 2008 Server

I thought I had heard somewhere that it wasn't a best practice to run a DC in a 
VM. I had tried to get confirmation on that a while back, but didn't have much 
luck. I don't see why running a DC in a Hyper-V VM would be a problem, though-I 
never really got a good answer on that.


John




From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: My First 2008 Server

So far that is all I have done.  I had mine come in back in May but was told to 
leave it off until 3rd week of June.  I will be doing my DC in Hyper-V which is 
very nice.

Jon
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:52 AM, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> wrote:
Woohoo! My new server arrived yesterday, and it'll be my first 2008
server in a domain/forest that currently has all 2003 machines. I'll
need to make it a DC, so I want to make sure I don't miss anything.

Looking at a couple of TechNet articles, it looks like I need to run
"adprep /forestprep" on the schema operations master and "adprep
/domainprep /gpprep" on the infrastructure operations master server.

Is that all?






John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~








~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

[Andy Ognenoff]

Death...oooh...cake, cake.

Ah ah, you said death first...oh, alright.


I was waiting for someone to quote that!

 - Andy O.

>-Original Message-
>From: Krishna Reddy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:56 AM
>To: NT System Admin Issues
>Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?
>
>Cake or death?


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Forced Computer Naming Convention

[Free, Bob]

Not possible via GPO. 3 solutions come to mind, you can either roll your own 
provisioning system that enforces your rules and require the techs to use it, 
pre-create the accounts centrally with compliant names and just let them join 
them or buy a 3rd party solution that has logic/rules baked in like what Quest 
calls Business Rules in their Active Roles product.

From: Don Guyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:09 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Forced Computer Naming Convention

Good Morning,

    The field techs have not been diligent with sticking to a 
systematic naming convention in the past. Is it possible to somehow force a 
naming convention onto computers joining the domain, using a GPO or something 
along those lines? We would like to force the name to begin with the regional 
location such as "phila-test-01".

Thanks!


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Disgruntled Sysadmin

[Steven Peck]

I had a conflict for the last one but will be at the next on the 31st.
 Maybe we can lure Bob Free down as well :)

Steven Peck
http://www.blkmtn.org

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Mike Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can we just drop all of the politicians in the Pacific and start over? At
> the very least they should all lose one months pay for every day we don't
> have a budget.
>
> You can still go to the meetings, it is a great learning experience and a
> chance to win some nice stuff.
>
> http://communities.vmware.com/community/vmug/us-west/sacramento
>
> To sign up just go here: http://www.vmware.com/vmug
>
> It's all free, including dinner!
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:23 AM, Joe Heaton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I don't Mike.  We haven't implemented VM yet.  I'm supposed to go to the
>> class for it this next fiscal year, but that will depend on the state
>> actually passing a budget.  At this point, I'm just hoping that I continue
>> to get paid…
>>
>>
>>
>> Joe Heaton
>>
>> 
>>
>> From: Mike Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:57 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Disgruntled Sysadmin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG -
>> http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1556 - Release
>> Date: 7/16/2008 4:56 PM
>
>
> --
> Mike Sullivan
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[Michael Ross]

No, Cloogy .. he makes those Ocean's 13 movies..  :P

 

From: Kent, Larry CTR USA IMCOM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:21 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

Z

 

cloogy?  At first I thought this was Rhode Island slang, but it is listed in
the Urban dictionary. We proper Bostonians spell it 'kludgey'  :)

 

- Larry

 

  _  

From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

Funny part is I found the VMware Update Manager for the patches to be sum
what cloogy at best, I want all my VM's to be uniform on patches, and it
doesn't seem, to know what patches or arent applied to the ESX guests
already. So its Still Shavlik to the rescue. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505

  _  

From: James Rankin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: My First 2008 Server

[John Hornbuckle]

So if I don't do that with the VM that acts as a DC, I should be okay?
Could I think have that VM DC handle FSMO roles?

 

 

 

 

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:46 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: My First 2008 Server

 

There is a really good whitepaper on this on the Microsoft website. I
posted the link a few weeks ago - check the archives. The main issue is
USN rollback. That is just a fact of reverting to a previous snapshot -
no matter what the virtualisation product

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, 18 July 2008 12:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: My First 2008 Server

 

I thought I had heard somewhere that it wasn't a best practice to run a
DC in a VM. I had tried to get confirmation on that a while back, but
didn't have much luck. I don't see why running a DC in a Hyper-V VM
would be a problem, though-I never really got a good answer on that.

 

 

John

 

 

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: My First 2008 Server

 

So far that is all I have done.  I had mine come in back in May but was
told to leave it off until 3rd week of June.  I will be doing my DC in
Hyper-V which is very nice.

 

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:52 AM, John Hornbuckle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Woohoo! My new server arrived yesterday, and it'll be my first 2008
server in a domain/forest that currently has all 2003 machines. I'll
need to make it a DC, so I want to make sure I don't miss anything.

Looking at a couple of TechNet articles, it looks like I need to run
"adprep /forestprep" on the schema operations master and "adprep
/domainprep /gpprep" on the infrastructure operations master server.

Is that all?






John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us  


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: My First 2008 Server

[Ken Schaefer]

There is a really good whitepaper on this on the Microsoft website. I posted 
the link a few weeks ago - check the archives. The main issue is USN rollback. 
That is just a fact of reverting to a previous snapshot - no matter what the 
virtualisation product

Cheers
Ken

From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 18 July 2008 12:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: My First 2008 Server

I thought I had heard somewhere that it wasn't a best practice to run a DC in a 
VM. I had tried to get confirmation on that a while back, but didn't have much 
luck. I don't see why running a DC in a Hyper-V VM would be a problem, though-I 
never really got a good answer on that.


John




From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: My First 2008 Server

So far that is all I have done.  I had mine come in back in May but was told to 
leave it off until 3rd week of June.  I will be doing my DC in Hyper-V which is 
very nice.

Jon
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:52 AM, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> wrote:
Woohoo! My new server arrived yesterday, and it'll be my first 2008
server in a domain/forest that currently has all 2003 machines. I'll
need to make it a DC, so I want to make sure I don't miss anything.

Looking at a couple of TechNet articles, it looks like I need to run
"adprep /forestprep" on the schema operations master and "adprep
/domainprep /gpprep" on the infrastructure operations master server.

Is that all?






John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~





~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

[OT] Thursday funny

[Phillip Partipilo]

If this isn't a photoshop, and the sign has been up for any appreciable
amount of time, this restaurant has to be using this as some kind of PR gig.

http://www.livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/07/17/Chinese_restaurant_takes_the_
cake_for_naming_error

If it wraps,

http://tinyurl.com/5pcme4

 
Phillip Partipilo
Parametric Solutions Inc.
Jupiter, Florida
(561) 747-6107
 
 



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[David Lum]

+1 here in Oregon too

 

From: Kent, Larry CTR USA IMCOM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:21 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

Z

 

cloogy?  At first I thought this was Rhode Island slang, but it is
listed in the Urban dictionary. We proper Bostonians spell it 'kludgey'
:)

 

- Larry

 



From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

Funny part is I found the VMware Update Manager for the patches to be
sum what cloogy at best, I want all my VM's to be uniform on patches,
and it doesn't seem, to know what patches or arent applied to the ESX
guests already. So its Still Shavlik to the rescue. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: James Rankin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[Kent, Larry CTR USA IMCOM]

Z
 
cloogy?  At first I thought this was Rhode Island slang, but it is
listed in the Urban dictionary. We proper Bostonians spell it 'kludgey'
:)
 
- Larry



From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla



Funny part is I found the VMware Update Manager for the patches to be
sum what cloogy at best, I want all my VM's to be uniform on patches,
and it doesn't seem, to know what patches or arent applied to the ESX
guests already. So its Still Shavlik to the rescue. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: James Rankin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

 






~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Forced Computer Naming Convention

[Don Guyer]

Good Morning,

 

The field techs have not been diligent with sticking to
a systematic naming convention in the past. Is it possible to somehow
force a naming convention onto computers joining the domain, using a GPO
or something along those lines? We would like to force the name to begin
with the regional location such as "phila-test-01".

 

Thanks!

 

Don Guyer

Systems Engineer

Information Services Department

Prudential Fox Roach/ Trident

431 W. Lancaster Avenue

Devon, PA 19333

Ph: (610) 993-3299

Fax: (610) 650-5306

www.prufoxroach.com http://www.prufoxroach.com/> 

[EMAIL PROTECTED]  

 




This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed. It may contain information protected by  
state and federal privacy and intellectual property laws. 
If you have received this email in error please 
notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail from 
your system. If you are not the named addressee you should 
not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail, and you are 
notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any 
action in reliance on the contents of this information is
strictly prohibited. 



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Increase in Viruses

[Stefan Jafs]

I don't like this trend, this is what Ninja has found: 

 

April = 0

May = 1

June = 65

July MTD = 213

 

They are: HTML/Bankphish.HY and JA

 

Anyone else seen this kind of increase?

 

__
Stefan Jafs 

 




This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico 
Corpoartion company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure 
no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility 
for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[Ziots, Edward]

Funny part is I found the VMware Update Manager for the patches to be
sum what cloogy at best, I want all my VM's to be uniform on patches,
and it doesn't seem, to know what patches or arent applied to the ESX
guests already. So its Still Shavlik to the rescue. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: James Rankin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

[Krishna Reddy]

Cake or death? 


Krishna Reddy
IT Manager
Nucomm, Inc.


-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:47 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Peak10 as a co-lo?

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Tim Vander Kooi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Mmmm...Cake!!!

The cake is a lie.

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~





The information contained in this email and attachments to this email are the 
proprietary and confidential property 
of Nucomm, Inc.  The information is provided in strict confidence and shall not 
be reproduced, copied, or
used (partially or wholly) in any manner without prior, express written 
authorization of Nucomm, Inc.


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Disgruntled Sysadmin

[Mike Sullivan]

Can we just drop all of the politicians in the Pacific and start over? At
the very least they should all lose one months pay for every day we don't
have a budget.

You can still go to the meetings, it is a great learning experience and a
chance to win some nice stuff.

http://communities.vmware.com/community/vmug/us-west/sacramento

To sign up just go here: http://www.vmware.com/vmug

It's all free, including dinner!


On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:23 AM, Joe Heaton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  I don't Mike.  We haven't implemented VM yet.  I'm supposed to go to the
> class for it this next fiscal year, but that will depend on the state
> actually passing a budget.  At this point, I'm just hoping that I continue
> to get paid…
>
>
>
> Joe Heaton
>   --
>
> *From:* Mike Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:57 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Disgruntled Sysadmin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG -
> http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1556 -
> Release Date: 7/16/2008 4:56 PM




-- 
Mike Sullivan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

WSUS Slowness

[James Kerr]

I have a new install of WSUS on the server that had it before. I wiped the 
drive and reinstalled everything. This time round I am finding that WSUS is 
running very slow listing and approving updates and just very slow in 
general. The only difference is that now the machine is a DC. I saw some 
info about running a SQL script that is supposed to speed it up but its very 
dated. Anyone else have this problem before?


Full disclosure: This server is old. P3 1.4GHz w/ 768MB but it didnt run 
this slow before. Maybe its the added overhead of having AD now?


James 



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Peak10 as a co-lo?

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Tim Vander Kooi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mmmm...Cake!!!

The cake is a lie.

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:42 AM, James Rankin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't doubt there will be an exploit ...

  The details of the exploit are supposedly going to be publiclly
disclosed next month by Dan K. at a conference, so that seems like a
safe bet.  :-)

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

[Tim Vander Kooi]

Mmmm...Cake!!!

-Original Message-
From: Andy Shook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:14 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

Dude,
Just looking for a customer's prospective and experiences, so shut your
cake hole... :)

Shook
-Original Message-
From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 4:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?

Coolio...

So if you have a friend there, you don't just trust his advice on using
them
as a co-lo? ;)

 - Andy O.

>-Original Message-
>From: Andy Shook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 2:55 PM
>To: NT System Admin Issues
>Subject: RE: Peak10 as a co-lo?
>
>Just fired off an email to one of my friends who work's there.  I'll
let
>you know what happens...


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[James Rankin]

I don't doubt there will be an exploit, even tho they claimed it couldn't be
reverse engineered. However our normal patch cycle already has it covered.
VMWare Update Manager makes it miles easier, it even converts your
templates, patches them, then converts them back. Sweet.

2008/7/17 Ziots, Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

>  If you think there isnt going to be a exploit for this latest DNS patch,
> then you don't listen in the underground much, they are already reverse
> engineering the patch M$ put out and I don't doubt that you will be seeing
> an exploit before or after Black Hat this year.
>
>
>
> Z
>
>
>
> Edward E. Ziots
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Lifespan Organization
>
> MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
>
> Phone: 401-639-3505
>   --
>
> *From:* James Rankin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:19 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Ziots, Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you think there isnt going to be a exploit for this latest DNS patch ...

  All these patches do is introduce randomization of the UDP source
port used by DNS resolvers to send queries.  That is simply
implementing something that was suggested as a good practice something
like a decade ago.  It's doesn't reveal anything about the new
exploit, other than it has something to do with DNS spoofing and
caching poising, which was already public info with the patch
announcements.

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:31 AM, David Lum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> DNS flaws called overblown by researcher
> http://security.blogs.techtarget.com/2008/07/14/dns-flaws-called-overblown-by-researcher/

  (1) Paul Vixie, who understands DNS as well as anyone alive, has
been given details of the exploit, and said that yes, it's the real
thing.  Personally, I trust him to understand DNS more than I trust
the author of BinDiff to understand DNS.

  (2) All that blog author is saying (who *isn't* privy to the details
of the exploit) is saying is that people in general already shouldn't
trust DNS to be correct.  Which is true.

  (3) The problem is, most people trust DNS *all* the time, and just
about everyone does at least some of the time.  I'm trusting DNS to
help get this message I'm sending to this list.  We trust
www.microsoft.com to take us there.  And if effective DNS hijacks are
script-kiddie easy, then someone can hijack Amazon, eBay, or a bank,
and the only thing users will get is a warning about the SSL
certificate being from an untrusted certificate authority.  Given that
there are already a ton of such certificates in production use, and
that most users will click buttons until "the website works again", I
don't think that's much help.  The blog author misses the practical
impact this would have in the real world.  (The one outside the
computer room, with the blue ceiling and that one bright light way up
high.)

  Here's some actual information from actual qualified people:

"Ow My Toe" and "An Astonishing Collaboration", by Dan Kaminsky,
DoxPara research (original publisher)
http://www.doxpara.com/

"Not a Guessing Game", 14 July, by Paul Vixie
http://www.circleid.com/posts/87143_dns_not_a_guessing_game/

CERT Vulnerability information
http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/800113

-- Ben

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: My First 2008 Server

[Jon Harris]

I have no choice in the matter by year end I have to migrate both of my
physical DC's to the virtual environment.  One of the machines has been
having hardware issues for the last 6 months the other has not.  Of the 6
boxes I have up at the moment 2 are setup to be virtual hosts.  One of the
machines to be shutdown is more than 10 years old and ready to be retired.
At the moment I can shut down 2 physical boxes with no loss to the network.
I hope by the end of next week to make it 3 down with no loss.  Politics is
not a good reason to do things and this is all due to politics.

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:15 AM, John Hornbuckle <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  I thought I had heard somewhere that it wasn't a best practice to run a
> DC in a VM. I had tried to get confirmation on that a while back, but didn't
> have much luck. I don't see why running a DC in a Hyper-V VM would be a
> problem, though—I never really got a good answer on that.
>
>
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:57 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: My First 2008 Server
>
>
>
> So far that is all I have done.  I had mine come in back in May but was
> told to leave it off until 3rd week of June.  I will be doing my DC in
> Hyper-V which is very nice.
>
>
>
> Jon
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:52 AM, John Hornbuckle <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Woohoo! My new server arrived yesterday, and it'll be my first 2008
> server in a domain/forest that currently has all 2003 machines. I'll
> need to make it a DC, so I want to make sure I don't miss anything.
>
> Looking at a couple of TechNet articles, it looks like I need to run
> "adprep /forestprep" on the schema operations master and "adprep
> /domainprep /gpprep" on the infrastructure operations master server.
>
> Is that all?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> John Hornbuckle
> MIS Department
> Taylor County School District
> 318 North Clark Street
> Perry, FL 32347
>
> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

[Ziots, Edward]

If you think there isnt going to be a exploit for this latest DNS patch,
then you don't listen in the underground much, they are already reverse
engineering the patch M$ put out and I don't doubt that you will be
seeing an exploit before or after Black Hat this year. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: James Rankin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Comments on the recent DNS Cache poisoning hoopla

 

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: My First 2008 Server

[Michael B. Smith]

Correct and correct.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com


-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:18 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: My First 2008 Server

Let me make sure I'm clear on one other thing... Adprep comes on the
Server 2008 disk, but I don't actually run it on the Server 2008
machine, right? Do I put that disk in my Server 2003 DC and run it from
there?




-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:56 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: My First 2008 Server

Three steps actually:

Adprep /forestprep
Adprep /domainprep
Adprep /domainprep /gpprep

At least, that's what I do.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com


-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:52 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: My First 2008 Server

Woohoo! My new server arrived yesterday, and it'll be my first 2008
server in a domain/forest that currently has all 2003 machines. I'll
need to make it a DC, so I want to make sure I don't miss anything.

Looking at a couple of TechNet articles, it looks like I need to run
"adprep /forestprep" on the schema operations master and "adprep
/domainprep /gpprep" on the infrastructure operations master server.

Is that all?






John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Disgruntled Sysadmin

[Joe Heaton]

That link is giving me a 404 error.  Tried searching for it from the
home site, with the same results... odd.

Joe Heaton
-Original Message-
From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 3:00 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Disgruntled Sysadmin

Hey don't forget to add yourself to the NTSYSADMIN Frappr map!

http://www.frappr.com/ntsysadmin

- Andy O.

>-Original Message-
>From: Steven Peck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 4:48 PM
>To: NT System Admin Issues
>Subject: Re: Disgruntled Sysadmin
>
>You're in Sacramento?  Maybe we should see how many of us are here.  I
>know at least 2 others on the list are somewhat local.


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1555 - Release Date:
7/16/2008 6:43 AM

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Disgruntled Sysadmin

[Joe Heaton]

I don't Mike.  We haven't implemented VM yet.  I'm supposed to go to the
class for it this next fiscal year, but that will depend on the state
actually passing a budget.  At this point, I'm just hoping that I
continue to get paid...

 

Joe Heaton



From: Mike Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Disgruntled Sysadmin

 

 
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG -
http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.0/1556 -
Release Date: 7/16/2008 4:56 PM

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: My First 2008 Server

[Michael B. Smith]

You shouldn't use VM DR techniques to restore a DC, that's what it comes
down to. You can search at support.microsoft.com for a KB that discusses
"USN Rollback" for the technical details why not to do that.

 

There is also a white-paper at Microsoft.com/downloads named something like
"Best Practices for Running Domain Controllers in a Virtualization
Environment".

 

Sorry I didn't do the searches. :-P

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith

MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

http://TheEssentialExchange.com

 

From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: My First 2008 Server

 

I thought I had heard somewhere that it wasn't a best practice to run a DC
in a VM. I had tried to get confirmation on that a while back, but didn't
have much luck. I don't see why running a DC in a Hyper-V VM would be a
problem, though-I never really got a good answer on that.

 

 

John

 

 

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: My First 2008 Server

 

So far that is all I have done.  I had mine come in back in May but was told
to leave it off until 3rd week of June.  I will be doing my DC in Hyper-V
which is very nice.

 

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:52 AM, John Hornbuckle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Woohoo! My new server arrived yesterday, and it'll be my first 2008
server in a domain/forest that currently has all 2003 machines. I'll
need to make it a DC, so I want to make sure I don't miss anything.

Looking at a couple of TechNet articles, it looks like I need to run
"adprep /forestprep" on the schema operations master and "adprep
/domainprep /gpprep" on the infrastructure operations master server.

Is that all?






John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us  


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: My First 2008 Server

[David Lum]

Per MS it's OK as long as they don't hold any FSMO roles.

 

We recommend that you locate critical server roles on domain controllers
that are installed directly on physical hardware. Critical server roles
include the following: 

* Global catalog servers 

* Domain Name System (DNS) servers 

* Operations master roles, also known as flexible single master
operations (FSMO)

 

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888794

 

Dave Lum  - Systems Engineer 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - (971)-222-1025
"..remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by
riding the back of the tiger ended up inside"  - JFK

 

From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 7:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: My First 2008 Server

 

I thought I had heard somewhere that it wasn't a best practice to run a
DC in a VM. I had tried to get confirmation on that a while back, but
didn't have much luck. I don't see why running a DC in a Hyper-V VM
would be a problem, though-I never really got a good answer on that.

 

 

John

 

 

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: My First 2008 Server

 

So far that is all I have done.  I had mine come in back in May but was
told to leave it off until 3rd week of June.  I will be doing my DC in
Hyper-V which is very nice.

 

Jon

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:52 AM, John Hornbuckle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Woohoo! My new server arrived yesterday, and it'll be my first 2008
server in a domain/forest that currently has all 2003 machines. I'll
need to make it a DC, so I want to make sure I don't miss anything.

Looking at a couple of TechNet articles, it looks like I need to run
"adprep /forestprep" on the schema operations master and "adprep
/domainprep /gpprep" on the infrastructure operations master server.

Is that all?






John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us  


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~