@ChrisL said in NTG Lab Update:
@Dashrender said in NTG Lab Update:
Any reason not to tell us what the missing part is/was?
SECRECY!
No, it was an SFP Module.
The main component of the lab is the 6-node Scale cluster, and the LAN-side connection for those goes to a switch that has a single connection up the chain, which requires an adapter (RJ-45/SFP), which is very small and easy to misplace in a big move.
@scottalanmiller said:
@art_of_shred said:
@scottalanmiller said:
There really is no IT without business (e.g. owner) perspective. The two are one and the same.
Strongly disagree.
In what way? How does IT do anything without the context of business? I don't even know what that would mean. There is business without IT, of course. But IT is an aspect of business. Outside of a business context, there is nothing like IT.
What you are in essence saying is that IT is as important to the owner as the business is to IT. It may be true on paper, within a certain frame of reference, but I have hardly ever experienced a situation where the owner treated IT as something of influence. To the average business owner, IT is a necessary evil (complete overhead). The fact that you assess it completely from the other side shows a "how it looks from the IT side" perspective.
@hobbit666 said in Using a NAS for backups & Unitrends FREE:
Just thinking while I was typing a different reply since the server will be wiped and XenServer installed I'll be loosing the VM datastore anyway so guessing "achieving" them to the NAS is better so when XenServer is running and I redeploy unitrends I can "restore" from said achieve
Then I'll most probably use XO to handle backups (unless people think unitrends would be better than XO) and use the NAS as normal. As for now this is only to move servers so to speak
If that makes sense lol
The only thing that didn't make sense is that I think you meant "archiving".
@BRRABill said:
@art_of_shred said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Can't always change things. The important thing, IMHO, is making sure that they understand that IT does not approve and that we see it as them not taking their business seriously. It's one thing to support what we are told to support, it is another to empower bad decision making by making it "seem acceptable."
This is where the "OMG we're all gonna die if we use QB" started to creep in. Before this post, I agreed with your point about not condoning bad decisions. At this point is where it began to turn and just become silly.
That's my take here.
Is QB really THAT BAD? Or rather THAT DAMAGING to business profit?
Exactly, the point of the OP got lost in this "anyone who uses QB might as well just walk into the office with a gas can and a lighter" direction.
@scottalanmiller said in Using a NAS for backups & Unitrends FREE:
@hobbit666 said in Using a NAS for backups & Unitrends FREE:
The version I got doesn't seem to support XenServer?
Not at the hypervisor / platform level. You need to work with agents the same as if it was physical. Doesn't work with ESXi Free, either.
ESXi Free version has no backup API's... that's the issue.
So, can we come back to the point where we all agree that using less-than-optimal products/infrastructure is not the best thing to do, and therefore we should always avoid such things for the sake of the business and the benefit of all involved in the effects of such a decision, whenever the opportunity to avoid them is available? If so, I think that's where it ends.
@JaredBusch said in UBNT EdgeRouter site to site VPN routes?:
@coliver said in UBNT EdgeRouter site to site VPN routes?:
Out of curiosity is there a reason to use OpenVPN over IPSEC?
This is not my setup, so I have no idea on their reasons.
I use OpenVPN when connecting a home router into an office for site to site because OpenVPN has long worked better (for me) with dynamic IP addresses.
I will use IPSEC for static assigned offices because you get more throughput when offloading is enabled.
I don't see any reason we couldn't/shouldn't use IPSEC.
@RojoLoco said:
@coliver I read it on a spicy food website, but I'm going to add it to my dating profile
Does your wife know?
EDIT: I was reading this as though it were Chad who made that comment. Oops. 
I would certainly read that to mean that you have API-based "agentless" protection for VM's on XS.
@Dashrender said:
@Minion-Queen said:
@Dashrender Yeah pretty much. He did that and remodeling for years. But it sucks in the winter months.
If that was a primary source of income, wouldn't it make sense to install a propane heater in the garage?
Actually, I have a complete woodshop, aside from the garage. The main issue is with things like open-flame heat sources and sawdust...
Nothing wrong with USB-attached backup storage... if you have the time to wait out the write speed.
I'm just not out there enough to justify the cost to put in heat and then to keep it heated. If I were heating it up and letting it cool off at night, think of what that does to raw wood. It's so much simpler to say screw it, I don't do much in the winter months. I stay inside where it's warm.
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@coliver said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@Dashrender said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@DustinB3403 said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
The term cheap to me (and I think others) means it needs to perform to the level that we can still run production (or whatever the use case is) and save more money than what we may have been proposed before.
That's an undefinable definition. Cheap but not the cheapest, good but not the best for us. So not the best option for the business, but not recklessly cheap. How do you make decisions around that? How do you decide what is "cheap enough" while being "not so bad" but not just choosing "what is best for the financial interest of the business?"
I'm seriously, without a clear definition but also without the goal of doing what is right for the business... what's the motivator for this? What makes something the lesser choice, but good enough?
Isn't part of being the best solution also having the lowest cost while still getting all of the needed items from that solution?
Right, but cheap denotes that you are making sacrifices that would stop you from getting the best solution for you business. At least to me it does.
Exactly. "Best" is no longer the decision factor... something else is. Anything else, is bad. Cheap is just one of many bad options.
I think it's important to make the distinction that "best" is not a factor. It is a matrix, unlike "cheap", which is tied to a single factor.
@JaredBusch ...and I think I know who's holding down the fort back at the hotel with the pool.
@aaron said in Iphone 7+:
@Minion-Queen do you find a big reason to upgrade from a 6?
Sure I've gone through three screens, but I can't justify 700 bucks and haven't found a killer feature.
Notice where the "?" mark is. The QUESTION was "did you find a big reason to upgrade?" The word "feature" is nowhere to be seen. The following line is a comment about your personal criteria for justifying an upgrade. That was not in the question portion. Yeah, she had a big reason to upgrade: the plan. Asking about some new feature that would justify an upgrade for you isn't there. You may be meaning to ask it, but you didn't. Plus 10 points to @JaredBusch for basic English skills.
@scottalanmiller said:
I feel like Art should write a book: "Art's Guide to Putting Up with Morons".
I'm sure I have enough mental notes to write a manuscript from.
@DustinB3403 said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@Dashrender said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@DustinB3403 said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@Dashrender said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@Dashrender said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@dafyre said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
This was prevalent for a number of years at my job... As I was leaving, it did not seem to be quite as large of a problem.
Why is it a problem at all? As long as everyone knows who is the IT decision maker, that's all that matters. That's the person you (I dislike saying this) blame when things don't work because of some decision that was made.
I agree, I see no problem at all. Not even sure what the perceived one is. Maybe that the IT Managers were not admitting that htey were?
LOL - exactly - that is the real problem. For example, my boss (or the board) are the ones that make the decision, not me. Therefore the fault is really there's. But they don't see it that way, which of course is crazy... instead they say - hey Dash, that solution that I picked from the ones you provided was shit, this is your fault.
I would argue that you shouldn't ever propose a solution that could turn into shit.
Only provide options that will work, and then the business can't make the "wrong choice" and have wasted money.
Seriously? You've never has a solution that went sideways - for whatever reason? You're a lucky man!
I wouldn't say I've never had a solution that has gone sideways, but I've only ever supplied solutions that are acceptable and proven to work.
Rather than going with an off-the wall solutions like using FreeNAS for a file server.
Sure it could work, but honestly why would any business or IT person consider or do this.
I think that's the issue. You provide 2 good choices, and then flippantly say something like... "I guess you could do stupid option C, but that would be retarded." Boss chooses option C, obviously, and the subsequent failure is on you.
@MattSpeller but, feel free to throw beer at your TV if it makes you feel better.
@DustinB3403 said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@art_of_shred said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@DustinB3403 said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@Dashrender said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@Dashrender said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@dafyre said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
This was prevalent for a number of years at my job... As I was leaving, it did not seem to be quite as large of a problem.
Why is it a problem at all? As long as everyone knows who is the IT decision maker, that's all that matters. That's the person you (I dislike saying this) blame when things don't work because of some decision that was made.
I agree, I see no problem at all. Not even sure what the perceived one is. Maybe that the IT Managers were not admitting that htey were?
LOL - exactly - that is the real problem. For example, my boss (or the board) are the ones that make the decision, not me. Therefore the fault is really there's. But they don't see it that way, which of course is crazy... instead they say - hey Dash, that solution that I picked from the ones you provided was shit, this is your fault.
I would argue that you shouldn't ever propose a solution that could turn into shit.
Only provide options that will work, and then the business can't make the "wrong choice" and have wasted money.
What?!? You must be new at this. Management will seldom let you get away with only providing good options, especially when they dictate your parameters with inane boundaries.
So the onus of deciding what solutions management gets to "review" is on you to present to management. It's your responsibility to say "That isn't an option, here is why it doesn't meet the needs of the business here, here and here"
Or whatever reasons. But business reasons should be the reasons that a solution isn't an option.
Sadly, they still have the authority to select the thing you said was not an option, and only recall that you mentioned it; thus it is your fault.
@Minion-Queen said:
Just make sure you keep some cheap beer next to you for that.
...and a TV you don't care about.
