Posts made by Jason

Where's the support for Microsoft?

@Dashrender said:

Dymo label print servers don't support IPv6

I wouldn't know, we consider those consumer grade they break too much. We use ones like these:

http://www.cubprinter.com/?q=CB-1024

@Dashrender said:

Yep - main things that have static IPs - Printers, Phones, Server and Switches!!

You have phones with Staitc IPs? that's a lot of trouble for nothing.

@Dashrender said:

@scottalanmiller said:

I've done the move before, with a little good planning it is surprisingly simple and painless. Normally, at least.

Frankly I'd prefer to jump directly to IPv6, but like the rest i have many printers that don't support IPv6. I wonder if my IP phones do? Not that I need to really worry about them.

I would hope so, all of our phones and printer support IPv6.

We have so many different subnets it's going to be take us a while to move to IPv6.

@Dashrender said:

not that I have the need, but is HAProxy free? I'd like to assume yes because it's Open Source, but I want to ask to make sure.

There's a free version and an enterprise version which is subscription based. Both are open source, but the enterpise version is just a customized one by a third party and isn't the official one and is rather dumb.

@coliver said:

@Jason said:

NAT is just address translation doesn't do any blocking your firewall does that. Just because you know where somethings at doesn't mean you get it. It's like saying you are granted access to a building just because you know the address.

We use some NAT internally but I hate it. But when you do lots of mergers it comes with the territory you can't go re-scoping everything and breaking stuff right away.

That's for later?

The rescoping yes, the breaking hopefully not, we get to know the systems and how they are setup more fully (but still possible.)

NAT is just address translation doesn't do any blocking your firewall does that. Just because you know where somethings at doesn't mean you get in. It's like saying you are granted access to a building just because you know the address.

We use some NAT internally but I hate it. But when you do lots of mergers it comes with the territory you can't go re-scoping everything and breaking stuff right away.

@DustinB3403 said:

This seems like he's installed Hyper-V 2012 R2 onto an existing Windows Server 2012 R2 server as a "service". Rather than to bare metal.

Hyper-v never runs as a "service". Hyper-v is always a Type 1 Baremetal hypervisor running below the OS. Even if you have a Windows GUI on top of it.

@bbiAngie said:

I am getting it during the DNS options while doing the Promo

Click through it it's normal in most setups as the parent zone is not something that's yours.

@bbiAngie said:

A delegation for the DNS server cannot be created because the authoritative parent zone cannot be found or it does not run in Windows NS server. If you are integrating with an existing DNS infrastructure, you should manually create a delegation to this DNS server in the parent zone to ensure reliable name resolution from outside the domain "domain.name.". Otherwise, no action is required.

Translation?

It means it couldn't created one at the root, this is expected in many cases as the .com or root dns is not yours.

@scottalanmiller said:

Not crazy that it is not enforced. Lots of licensing depends on trust.

I meant crazy that a CCIE guy at a reseller would say that on record.

@Dashrender said:

DNS isn't required, or mandated by the promotion (unless that was changed in 2012 R2) but I'd highly recommend it (might even be considered best practices) and should be offered to be installed during promotion if you don't already have it installed.

DHCP isn't required. DNS very much is a required part of a DC (but doesn't have to be on the same server)

@dafyre said:

I would definitely check and make sure that DNS was installed on your second DC. Have you actually gone through the process to promote it from being a member server yet?

That will install with AD DS

In case someone thought this was crazy. The PDF attached was this: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/cube/configuration/cube-book/voi-cube-licensing.pdf

@scottalanmiller said:

That's a problem since one office obviously went to Bitlocker, now one is going away. So everyone goes this way and that based on what the last office did

Yep, mostly though no one thought using Bitlocker needed to be discussed because if a systems engineering decided his techs should use it that's his decision. But another one doesn't like it and wants everyone to stop and look at paid options.

@dafyre said:

Leit their office foot the bill?

If one location go to a solution we all do, it's all the same money though, It's part of the corporate IT budget.

Looks like we might have to move away from bitlocker, I would like to stay on it but the rest of my engineering team wants to move to a paid product that has more management of keys (even though you can store the bitlocker PDFs as well as store it in AD DS).

We have a "Sr. Solutions Expert" at a reseller tell us we did not need to buy CUBE licensing because Cisco says they do not enforce it. (He says in his email signatures he has a CCIEx2)

This is what they are referencing: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/cube/configuration/cube-book/voi-cube-licensing.pdf
On page 7 it says :

Q. Is CUBE Licensing enforced?
No, CUBE is a paper-based honor license (no file to install) that allows you to run the CUBE RTU
(Right-to-Use) feature set after you have the UCK9 license installed

Is this not the same case as CALs meaning they aren't enforced by a mechanism but you still need to buy to use.

You set your PDC Emulator to pull from a reliable NTP server then the rest will sync from that ex:

w32tm.exe /config /manualpeerlist:”0.us.pool.ntp.org 1.us.pool.ntp.org 2.us.pool.ntp.org 3.us.pool.ntp.org” /syncfromflags:manual /reliable:YES /update