[NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2
Following up with some results and another question. I added a second CPU, it helped but didn't solve the problem. After some more digging with Process Explorer it seems the culprit is the SMB 2.0 driver. It's chewing up the CPU but only with my Win7 clients. This article suggests in mixed client environments try disabling SMB 2 on the server and clients. Haven't done it yet. Anyone else experience issues related to the SMB 2 driver? It would explain why my Win XP clients don't experience the same issues as my Win 7. http://www.petri.co.il/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008.htm# -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Brian Desmond Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:35 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Capturing a dump of the system when the problem is occurring or collecting an xperf trace would be my approaches to start. 1 CPU is not really a great setup here. Thanks, Brian Desmond br...@briandesmond.com w - 312.625.1438 | c - 312.731.3132 -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of N Parr Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:07 PM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Only questions I didn't already answer are ~100 sessions 5 shares Virtual (same config as other file servers that don't experience this) 1 CPU Something else to add is I am snapping for previous file versions but CPU spikes never seem to coincide.I tend to agree it's something with the NIC because when System is spiking the CPU it's also the process with the highest network activity. And then it's only 2-4% utilization. There's not much I can do about that other than change the NIC type of the VM, but again it's using the same virtual adapter as my other file servers. -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Rink Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:45 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 what version OS is the server? nothing at all running on it other than a couple folder shares? how many users are hitting the box? how often is the spiking occuring? is it a virtual or physical box? how many cpu's or vcpus? have you tried updating the NIC driver on the server? does the cpu spike settle down on its own after awhile or do you have to reboot the client(s) and/or server? Just thinking out loud... From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] on behalf of N Parr [npar...@mortonind.com] Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:24 PM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] System process 100% CPU 08r2 I've been troubleshooting this for months now and I'm not getting anywhere but more confused. I have one file server that keeps spiking the system service at random times. Nothing else is running on the server, no AV or other apps. When this happens my win7 clients trying to access files on that server will come to a screeching halt. That's the really strange part, my XP clients keep working like nothing is wrong. I've done all the trouble shooting I can find for this problem, it's very hard to narrow down exactly what's causing the system process to spike. I noticed that one of the win7 clients in particular was moving a lot of data (receiving .5 MB/sec steady) but they had no apps running off the server, weren't searching, search service was turned off. But on that client it was the system service that was receiving the data from that server. I rebooted the client and the server cpu immediately went back to normal. My googling can't find anything that links the two together. Just hoping someone else has encountered this. Both client and server are patched but this has been going on for a long time, at least the last couple years. Thanks
[NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2
I'm not sure why you would disable this. What version of Windows is the file server running? Thanks, Brian Desmond br...@briandesmond.com w - 312.625.1438 | c - 312.731.3132 -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of N Parr Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 7:41 AM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Following up with some results and another question. I added a second CPU, it helped but didn't solve the problem. After some more digging with Process Explorer it seems the culprit is the SMB 2.0 driver. It's chewing up the CPU but only with my Win7 clients. This article suggests in mixed client environments try disabling SMB 2 on the server and clients. Haven't done it yet. Anyone else experience issues related to the SMB 2 driver? It would explain why my Win XP clients don't experience the same issues as my Win 7. http://www.petri.co.il/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008.htm# -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Brian Desmond Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:35 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Capturing a dump of the system when the problem is occurring or collecting an xperf trace would be my approaches to start. 1 CPU is not really a great setup here. Thanks, Brian Desmond br...@briandesmond.com w - 312.625.1438 | c - 312.731.3132 -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of N Parr Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:07 PM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Only questions I didn't already answer are ~100 sessions 5 shares Virtual (same config as other file servers that don't experience this) 1 CPU Something else to add is I am snapping for previous file versions but CPU spikes never seem to coincide.I tend to agree it's something with the NIC because when System is spiking the CPU it's also the process with the highest network activity. And then it's only 2-4% utilization. There's not much I can do about that other than change the NIC type of the VM, but again it's using the same virtual adapter as my other file servers. -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Rink Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:45 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 what version OS is the server? nothing at all running on it other than a couple folder shares? how many users are hitting the box? how often is the spiking occuring? is it a virtual or physical box? how many cpu's or vcpus? have you tried updating the NIC driver on the server? does the cpu spike settle down on its own after awhile or do you have to reboot the client(s) and/or server? Just thinking out loud... From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] on behalf of N Parr [npar...@mortonind.com] Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:24 PM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] System process 100% CPU 08r2 I've been troubleshooting this for months now and I'm not getting anywhere but more confused. I have one file server that keeps spiking the system service at random times. Nothing else is running on the server, no AV or other apps. When this happens my win7 clients trying to access files on that server will come to a screeching halt. That's the really strange part, my XP clients keep working like nothing is wrong. I've done all the trouble shooting I can find for this problem, it's very hard to narrow down exactly what's causing the system process to spike. I noticed that one of the win7 clients in particular was moving a lot of data (receiving .5 MB/sec steady) but they had no apps running off the server, weren't searching, search service was turned off. But on that client it was the system service that was receiving the data from that server. I rebooted the client and the server cpu immediately went back to normal. My googling can't find anything that links the two together. Just hoping someone else has encountered this. Both client and server are patched but this has been going on for a long time, at least the last couple years. Thanks
[NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2
Have you tried installing KB2775511 on the server and clients (it can be imported into WSUS from the Windows Updates Catalog). I saw a significant CPU load reduction after installing ti on a busy file server. Cheers, Phil -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of N Parr Sent: 20 September 2013 13:41 To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Following up with some results and another question. I added a second CPU, it helped but didn't solve the problem. After some more digging with Process Explorer it seems the culprit is the SMB 2.0 driver. It's chewing up the CPU but only with my Win7 clients. This article suggests in mixed client environments try disabling SMB 2 on the server and clients. Haven't done it yet. Anyone else experience issues related to the SMB 2 driver? It would explain why my Win XP clients don't experience the same issues as my Win 7. http://www.petri.co.il/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008.htm# -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Brian Desmond Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:35 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Capturing a dump of the system when the problem is occurring or collecting an xperf trace would be my approaches to start. 1 CPU is not really a great setup here. Thanks, Brian Desmond br...@briandesmond.com w - 312.625.1438 | c - 312.731.3132 -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of N Parr Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:07 PM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Only questions I didn't already answer are ~100 sessions 5 shares Virtual (same config as other file servers that don't experience this) 1 CPU Something else to add is I am snapping for previous file versions but CPU spikes never seem to coincide.I tend to agree it's something with the NIC because when System is spiking the CPU it's also the process with the highest network activity. And then it's only 2-4% utilization. There's not much I can do about that other than change the NIC type of the VM, but again it's using the same virtual adapter as my other file servers. -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Rink Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:45 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 what version OS is the server? nothing at all running on it other than a couple folder shares? how many users are hitting the box? how often is the spiking occuring? is it a virtual or physical box? how many cpu's or vcpus? have you tried updating the NIC driver on the server? does the cpu spike settle down on its own after awhile or do you have to reboot the client(s) and/or server? Just thinking out loud... From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] on behalf of N Parr [npar...@mortonind.com] Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:24 PM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] System process 100% CPU 08r2 I've been troubleshooting this for months now and I'm not getting anywhere but more confused. I have one file server that keeps spiking the system service at random times. Nothing else is running on the server, no AV or other apps. When this happens my win7 clients trying to access files on that server will come to a screeching halt. That's the really strange part, my XP clients keep working like nothing is wrong. I've done all the trouble shooting I can find for this problem, it's very hard to narrow down exactly what's causing the system process to spike. I noticed that one of the win7 clients in particular was moving a lot of data (receiving .5 MB/sec steady) but they had no apps running off the server, weren't searching, search service was turned off. But on that client it was the system service that was receiving the data from that server. I rebooted the client and the server cpu immediately went back to normal. My googling can't find anything that links the two together. Just hoping someone else has encountered this. Both client and server are patched but this has been going on for a long time, at least the last couple years. Thanks Hoople Ltd, Registered in England and Wales No. 7556595 Registered office: Plough Lane, Hereford, HR4 0LE Any opinion expressed in this e-mail or any attached files are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Hoople Ltd. You should be aware that Hoople Ltd. monitors its email service. This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the use of
[NTSysADM] Is this domain change, or just DNS play?
We have a development department that wants to do what seems to me to just be DNS hoky-poky. We have and internal domain structure of internaldomain.local, and this group is asking for DNS entries of host1.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local, host2.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local , etc. We don't have to create an actual subdomain to make those kind of DNS entries work, do we? Just create a new DNS zone? Specifically the request is we want these to point to the same IP address Host2.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local Host2.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local Host1.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local It just doesn't feel like we'd need to stand up an actual domain in the forest to achieve that... David Lum Sr. Systems Engineer // NWEATM Office 503.548.5229 // Cell (voice/text) 503.267.9764
Re: [NTSysADM] Is this domain change, or just DNS play?
You’re correct in your surmise. I always ask why the change is wanted though as there may be a better way to accomplish the desired goal. I don’t tell developers how to write code, they don’t tell me how to run the environment. As a general rule I don’t let non-admins create the solution; give me the desired end result and I’ll craft the solution. Said as nicely and cooperatively as possible, of course. From: David Lum Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 8:10 AM To: NTSysADM@lists.myITforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] Is this domain change, or just DNS play? We have a development department that wants to do what seems to me to just be DNS hoky-poky. We have and internal domain structure of internaldomain.local, and this group is asking for DNS entries of host1.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local, host2.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local , etc. We don’t have to create an actual subdomain to make those kind of DNS entries work, do we? Just create a new DNS zone? Specifically the request is “we want these to point to the same IP address” Host2.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local Host2.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local Host1.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local It just doesn’t feel like we’d need to stand up an actual domain in the forest to achieve that… David Lum Sr. Systems Engineer // NWEATM Office 503.548.5229 // Cell (voice/text) 503.267.9764
[NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
All, In the past couple of weeks, $work has had a problem with network interruptions - frequent gaps in network connectivity were all contact is lost with servers for brief periods of time (1-2 minutes, usually). I could see the gaps in the graphs on my (very new and incomplete - long story, don't ask) cacti installation. Unfortunately, I've been unable to get cacti to graph CPU utilization for the switches, because they're Procurves, and I couldn't find a working XML file or configuration for that. It's always happened while I've been unavailable, until today. Just now, I was able to show conclusively that our core layer3 switch (Procurve 3400cl-48G), which was hit hardest, spikes its CPU to 99% during these episodes. Volume of traffic is normal - ho huge spikes in that, just normal variation, AFAICT, from the cacti graphs. I haven't had time to see if other switches also spike their CPU, but given the gaps in the graphs, I suspect that's the case. I suspect someone is doing something stupid to create layer2 loop, as we have lots of little 5 and 8 port switches on desktops and in our engineering lab - and in spite of the fact that I've set our core switch as the root of the spanning tree. I'm setting up a box to do a tcpdump in a ring buffer with smallish files so that I can do analysis on them more easily. I'm not a packet analysis guy, though I've done some looking on occasion. Anyone have thoughts on what to look for when I start my analysis? Kurt
[NTSysADM] OT: A completely modular phone
*Phonebloks* - http://www.phonebloks.com/ Frankly, this is an idea whose time has arrived. I would absolutely support this if it were available (and I'm lending social media support to it now). Will the vendors support it, though? What say you? *ASB **http://XeeMe.com/AndrewBaker* http://xeeme.com/AndrewBaker* **Providing Virtual CIO Services (IT Operations Information Security) for the SMB market…***
Re: [NTSysADM] OT: A completely modular phone
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Andrew S. Baker asbz...@gmail.com wrote: Phonebloks - http://www.phonebloks.com/ Yah, initially, Android tried to do the modular software, empower-the-user approach. Turns out the carriers really do *not* want that. And in the US, at least, the wireless carriers pretty much own things. We're not customers, we're subjects. Also, the success of the iPhone demonstrates that a lot of people don't *want* choice; they want someone else to do their thinking for them. The entire computing world is heading towards sealed, integrated boxes. I'm not saying it's impossible. Just that the odds aren't good. Personally, I'm all for it. I just don't think it will happen. -- Ben
RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more...
I've probably heard the same explanations from the same people you did. All I can say is that it's a damn shame. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Free, Bob Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 1:17 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... And, I'll just throw this out there for thought: What does a Devices and Services company need with a user conference? Makes me wonder what Dell was thinking when they cancelled TEC. That left a huge gap. Where else could you see most of the strategists, product team, relevant vendors and MVPs for the particular technologies in one place? I've talked to some folks that have gone from NetPro--Quest--Dell employees and some that have left and I've heard the reasoning but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth and no real place for my specific conference/training needs. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 9:34 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Yep...I'll be there, speaking and running the Windows side of the event. I'd be very interested to get your candid impression after the week. We're evolving the IT Pro side of the event to match the best of MMS and the best of TechEd to supply a conference for the people, by the people instead of a marketing event like they've all turned into these days. So feedback and participation is highly appreciated. And, I'll just throw this out there for thought: What does a Devices and Services company need with a user conference? From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of John Cook Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 12:16 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Are you going to be at Connections? (or anybody on the list for that matter) I'm set to be there and would welcome the opportunity to meet some of you. John W. Cook Network Operations Manager Partnership For Strong Families 5950 NW 1st Place Gainesville, Fl 32607 Office (352)-244-1610tel:%28352%29-244-1610 Cell (352) 215-6944tel:%28352%29%20215-6944 MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS, CompTIA A+, N+, Security+ VSP4, VTSP4 [MCP_SE_c][MCTS][top_banner] [VMLOGO_VTSP_S_Q208][sales_prof_B] From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 11:53 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Yep...it's true. So, we're moving on. We've actually been prepared to move on for several years, but this year things just fit - just at the right time. It feels like the Seinfeld episode where Jerry just seems to even out know matter what. Loses a $20 bill, finds one in his pocket. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of James Rankin Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:36 AM To: NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.commailto:NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... http://myitforum.com/myitforumwp/2013/09/16/the-microsoft-management-summit-saying-goodbye-to-a-good-friend/ -- James Rankin Technical Consultant (ACA, CCA, MCTS) http://appsensebigot.blogspot.co.uk CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties. Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. PGE is committed to protecting our customers' privacy. To learn more, please visit http://www.pge.com/about/company/privacy/customer/ inline: image001.pnginline: image002.pnginline: image003.pnginline: image004.pnginline: image005.png
RE: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
I've seen a wire with both ends plugged into a little 5/8 port switch that caused the problem. But it was a long down time, until I found the wire. Mark -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Buff Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 10:59 AM To: NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem All, In the past couple of weeks, $work has had a problem with network interruptions - frequent gaps in network connectivity were all contact is lost with servers for brief periods of time (1-2 minutes, usually). I could see the gaps in the graphs on my (very new and incomplete - long story, don't ask) cacti installation. Unfortunately, I've been unable to get cacti to graph CPU utilization for the switches, because they're Procurves, and I couldn't find a working XML file or configuration for that. It's always happened while I've been unavailable, until today. Just now, I was able to show conclusively that our core layer3 switch (Procurve 3400cl-48G), which was hit hardest, spikes its CPU to 99% during these episodes. Volume of traffic is normal - ho huge spikes in that, just normal variation, AFAICT, from the cacti graphs. I haven't had time to see if other switches also spike their CPU, but given the gaps in the graphs, I suspect that's the case. I suspect someone is doing something stupid to create layer2 loop, as we have lots of little 5 and 8 port switches on desktops and in our engineering lab - and in spite of the fact that I've set our core switch as the root of the spanning tree. I'm setting up a box to do a tcpdump in a ring buffer with smallish files so that I can do analysis on them more easily. I'm not a packet analysis guy, though I've done some looking on occasion. Anyone have thoughts on what to look for when I start my analysis? Kurt
Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.com wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-4-3_rule That's for repeaters. If that applies, I'd suggest an alternate approach... ;-) -- Ben
Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote: ... core layer3 switch ... spikes its CPU to 99% during these episodes ... ... Volume of traffic is normal ... CPU spikes on a switch is usually something weird. Normal traffic is handled in the switch ASIC and doesn't touch the CPU at all. Typically it's things like ACLs or policy routing that hit the CPU. Got anything like that going on? ... layer2 loop ... A layer two loop will light up every switch port on the first broadcast packet (or trigger loop detection, which should get logged), so I don't think that's it. No, the configuration of the L3 switch is stupidly simple - I've got all of my servers plugged into it, and all of my distribution switches. It's got 34 of VLANs defined (max-vlans is set to 100), and it's x.x.x.1 on every subnet except the L2 VLAN that terminates on the firewall. I've got 4 x 4-port trunks on it (3 for my VMware boxes and one for the backup machine - the backup machine's trunk is LACP, the others are not, since VMware doesn't support LACP). No particular changes to the config in months (when I set up the LACP trunk for the backup machine. No ACLs, and two routes - a DG and a static to another switch for a lab subnet. Kurt
Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote: ... core layer3 switch ... spikes its CPU to 99% during these episodes ... ... Volume of traffic is normal ... CPU spikes on a switch is usually something weird. Normal traffic is handled in the switch ASIC and doesn't touch the CPU at all. Typically it's things like ACLs or policy routing that hit the CPU. Got anything like that going on? ... layer2 loop ... A layer two loop will light up every switch port on the first broadcast packet (or trigger loop detection, which should get logged), so I don't think that's it. -- Ben
Re: [NTSysADM] Is this domain change, or just DNS play?
LOL *ASB **http://XeeMe.com/AndrewBaker* http://xeeme.com/AndrewBaker* **Providing Virtual CIO Services (IT Operations Information Security) for the SMB market…*** On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 9:10 AM, David Lum david@nwea.org wrote: We have a development department that wants to do what seems to me to just be DNS hoky-poky. We have and internal domain structure of internaldomain.local, and this group is asking for DNS entries of host1.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local, host2.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local , etc. We don’t have to create an actual subdomain to make those kind of DNS entries work, do we? Just create a new DNS zone? You do not need to create a new Active Directory (sub)domain. You don't even need to create a new DNS zone of authority. Just create A resource records for the hostX names. You don't even need to have any resource records for ourdepartment.internaldomain.local. at all. (FYI: Technically all names in DNS are domain names. Even host1.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local. with just an A record is still a domain name. This usually doesn't matter, but as a DNS weenie I have to remark on this, or I'll lose my membership in the DNS Weenie Club. (I get 10% off all my SOA records.)) -- Ben
RE: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
We had a bad weekend a couple of month ago when every 24 minutes our LAN would pretty much vanish for about 30-60 seconds. It turns out what truly appeared to be a workgroup switch was actually a hub. One Friday afternoon it decided to show us all why hubs do not belong in networks. -- richard -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Buff Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 1:12 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote: ... core layer3 switch ... spikes its CPU to 99% during these episodes ... ... Volume of traffic is normal ... CPU spikes on a switch is usually something weird. Normal traffic is handled in the switch ASIC and doesn't touch the CPU at all. Typically it's things like ACLs or policy routing that hit the CPU. Got anything like that going on? ... layer2 loop ... A layer two loop will light up every switch port on the first broadcast packet (or trigger loop detection, which should get logged), so I don't think that's it. No, the configuration of the L3 switch is stupidly simple - I've got all of my servers plugged into it, and all of my distribution switches. It's got 34 of VLANs defined (max-vlans is set to 100), and it's x.x.x.1 on every subnet except the L2 VLAN that terminates on the firewall. I've got 4 x 4-port trunks on it (3 for my VMware boxes and one for the backup machine - the backup machine's trunk is LACP, the others are not, since VMware doesn't support LACP). No particular changes to the config in months (when I set up the LACP trunk for the backup machine. No ACLs, and two routes - a DG and a static to another switch for a lab subnet. Kurt The information contained in this e-mail, and any attachments hereto, is from The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals® (ASPCA®) and is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or use of the contents of this e-mail, and any attachments hereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me by reply email and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout thereof.
Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
Yes, that's why on my other switches (Procurve 2510-48), I have set up loop-detect parameters, in addition to spanning tree. I have it lock out the port for 10 minutes. Kurt On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Reimer, Mark mark.rei...@prairie.edu wrote: I've seen a wire with both ends plugged into a little 5/8 port switch that caused the problem. But it was a long down time, until I found the wire. Mark -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Buff Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 10:59 AM To: NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem All, In the past couple of weeks, $work has had a problem with network interruptions - frequent gaps in network connectivity were all contact is lost with servers for brief periods of time (1-2 minutes, usually). I could see the gaps in the graphs on my (very new and incomplete - long story, don't ask) cacti installation. Unfortunately, I've been unable to get cacti to graph CPU utilization for the switches, because they're Procurves, and I couldn't find a working XML file or configuration for that. It's always happened while I've been unavailable, until today. Just now, I was able to show conclusively that our core layer3 switch (Procurve 3400cl-48G), which was hit hardest, spikes its CPU to 99% during these episodes. Volume of traffic is normal - ho huge spikes in that, just normal variation, AFAICT, from the cacti graphs. I haven't had time to see if other switches also spike their CPU, but given the gaps in the graphs, I suspect that's the case. I suspect someone is doing something stupid to create layer2 loop, as we have lots of little 5 and 8 port switches on desktops and in our engineering lab - and in spite of the fact that I've set our core switch as the root of the spanning tree. I'm setting up a box to do a tcpdump in a ring buffer with smallish files so that I can do analysis on them more easily. I'm not a packet analysis guy, though I've done some looking on occasion. Anyone have thoughts on what to look for when I start my analysis? Kurt
[NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2
Yeah it sounds like your issue is probably the files you're storing. There are KBs out there that have tuning settings for the SMB stack on the server side that often help here. I'd also validate the perf of the storage that's backing this share. Thanks, Brian Desmond br...@briandesmond.com w - 312.625.1438 | c - 312.731.3132 -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of N Parr Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 9:04 AM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 I'm not either, that's why I'm asking 08R2 I already experimented with disabling it on my Win7 client and 2 others that have problems, not the server. Now ,according to resource monitor, instead of reading at 500KB/sec from the server I'm reading at 15MB/sec and I wasn't causing the CPU to spike like I did before. The other two workstations I disabled it on also seem to have stopped having/causing issues. There is a shared app that uses Access DB's and the CPU spikes almost always revolve around that app, when they are trying to do specific functions like filtering, saving, etc. But again, Win XP clients with this app never experience or cause this to happen. I'll have to watch it through the day and see if things keep behaving. Could be related to the KB Phil mentioned since pst and mdb files could both cause the same issue. Thanks -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Brian Desmond Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 7:57 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 I'm not sure why you would disable this. What version of Windows is the file server running? Thanks, Brian Desmond br...@briandesmond.com w - 312.625.1438 | c - 312.731.3132 -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of N Parr Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 7:41 AM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Following up with some results and another question. I added a second CPU, it helped but didn't solve the problem. After some more digging with Process Explorer it seems the culprit is the SMB 2.0 driver. It's chewing up the CPU but only with my Win7 clients. This article suggests in mixed client environments try disabling SMB 2 on the server and clients. Haven't done it yet. Anyone else experience issues related to the SMB 2 driver? It would explain why my Win XP clients don't experience the same issues as my Win 7. http://www.petri.co.il/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008.htm# -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Brian Desmond Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:35 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Capturing a dump of the system when the problem is occurring or collecting an xperf trace would be my approaches to start. 1 CPU is not really a great setup here. Thanks, Brian Desmond br...@briandesmond.com w - 312.625.1438 | c - 312.731.3132 -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of N Parr Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:07 PM To: 'ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com' Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 Only questions I didn't already answer are ~100 sessions 5 shares Virtual (same config as other file servers that don't experience this) 1 CPU Something else to add is I am snapping for previous file versions but CPU spikes never seem to coincide.I tend to agree it's something with the NIC because when System is spiking the CPU it's also the process with the highest network activity. And then it's only 2-4% utilization. There's not much I can do about that other than change the NIC type of the VM, but again it's using the same virtual adapter as my other file servers. -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Rink Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:45 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: System process 100% CPU 08r2 what version OS is the server? nothing at all running on it other than a couple folder shares? how many users are hitting the box? how often is the spiking occuring? is it a virtual or physical box? how many cpu's or vcpus? have you tried updating the NIC driver on the server? does the cpu spike settle down on its own after awhile or do you have to reboot the client(s) and/or server? Just thinking out loud... From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] on behalf of N Parr [npar...@mortonind.com] Sent: Monday, September 16,
Re: [NTSysADM] OT: A completely modular phone
* The entire computing world is heading towards sealed, integrated boxes. * T hat's because the non-techie portion of the planet is huge, has all the characteristics you outlined above, and holds tons of disposable cash... *Personally, I'm all for it. I just don't think it will happen.* That is my fear as well... *ASB **http://XeeMe.com/AndrewBaker* http://xeeme.com/AndrewBaker* **Providing Virtual CIO Services (IT Operations Information Security) for the SMB market…*** On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Andrew S. Baker asbz...@gmail.com wrote: Phonebloks - http://www.phonebloks.com/ Yah, initially, Android tried to do the modular software, empower-the-user approach. Turns out the carriers really do *not* want that. And in the US, at least, the wireless carriers pretty much own things. We're not customers, we're subjects. Also, the success of the iPhone demonstrates that a lot of people don't *want* choice; they want someone else to do their thinking for them. The entire computing world is heading towards sealed, integrated boxes. I'm not saying it's impossible. Just that the odds aren't good. Personally, I'm all for it. I just don't think it will happen. -- Ben
RE: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
I still use it. Violate the rule at your peril. :P From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Link Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 2:07 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem Is this the equivalent of Vader saying Your powers are weak, old man to Obi Wan? On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.commailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote: Sigh. Yes, but... The 5-4-3 rule was created when 10BASE5 and 10BASE2 were the only types of Ethernet network available. The rule only applies to shared-access 10 Mbit/s Ethernet backbones. The rule does not apply to switched Ethernet because each port on a switch constitutes a separate collision domain. :) Kurt On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.commailto:mich...@smithcons.com wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-4-3_rule -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Buff Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 12:59 PM To: NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.commailto:NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem All, In the past couple of weeks, $work has had a problem with network interruptions - frequent gaps in network connectivity were all contact is lost with servers for brief periods of time (1-2 minutes, usually). I could see the gaps in the graphs on my (very new and incomplete - long story, don't ask) cacti installation. Unfortunately, I've been unable to get cacti to graph CPU utilization for the switches, because they're Procurves, and I couldn't find a working XML file or configuration for that. It's always happened while I've been unavailable, until today. Just now, I was able to show conclusively that our core layer3 switch (Procurve 3400cl-48G), which was hit hardest, spikes its CPU to 99% during these episodes. Volume of traffic is normal - ho huge spikes in that, just normal variation, AFAICT, from the cacti graphs. I haven't had time to see if other switches also spike their CPU, but given the gaps in the graphs, I suspect that's the case. I suspect someone is doing something stupid to create layer2 loop, as we have lots of little 5 and 8 port switches on desktops and in our engineering lab - and in spite of the fact that I've set our core switch as the root of the spanning tree. I'm setting up a box to do a tcpdump in a ring buffer with smallish files so that I can do analysis on them more easily. I'm not a packet analysis guy, though I've done some looking on occasion. Anyone have thoughts on what to look for when I start my analysis? Kurt
Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote: No, the configuration of the L3 switch is stupidly simple ... Very odd that you're getting CPU spikes, then. You've done a show log -a on the switch right after the trouble and found nothing helpful, I presume? Have you checked for firmware updates? ... the backup machine's trunk is LACP ... Is the backup machine behaving itself? LACP reconfiguration prolly hits the CPU. STP will hit the CPU. But I'm shooting in the dark, here. I'd call HP support. They know what magic commands to issue to get the switch to cough up relevant debug info. No ACLs, and two routes - a DG and a static to another switch for a lab subnet. I believe routing is done on ASICs with that model anyway. -- Ben
Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
No, I figured he was having me on... Kurt On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com wrote: Is this the equivalent of Vader saying Your powers are weak, old man to Obi Wan? On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote: Sigh. Yes, but... The 5-4-3 rule was created when 10BASE5 and 10BASE2 were the only types of Ethernet network available. The rule only applies to shared-access 10 Mbit/s Ethernet backbones. The rule does not apply to switched Ethernet because each port on a switch constitutes a separate collision domain. :) Kurt On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.com wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-4-3_rule -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Buff Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 12:59 PM To: NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem All, In the past couple of weeks, $work has had a problem with network interruptions - frequent gaps in network connectivity were all contact is lost with servers for brief periods of time (1-2 minutes, usually). I could see the gaps in the graphs on my (very new and incomplete - long story, don't ask) cacti installation. Unfortunately, I've been unable to get cacti to graph CPU utilization for the switches, because they're Procurves, and I couldn't find a working XML file or configuration for that. It's always happened while I've been unavailable, until today. Just now, I was able to show conclusively that our core layer3 switch (Procurve 3400cl-48G), which was hit hardest, spikes its CPU to 99% during these episodes. Volume of traffic is normal - ho huge spikes in that, just normal variation, AFAICT, from the cacti graphs. I haven't had time to see if other switches also spike their CPU, but given the gaps in the graphs, I suspect that's the case. I suspect someone is doing something stupid to create layer2 loop, as we have lots of little 5 and 8 port switches on desktops and in our engineering lab - and in spite of the fact that I've set our core switch as the root of the spanning tree. I'm setting up a box to do a tcpdump in a ring buffer with smallish files so that I can do analysis on them more easily. I'm not a packet analysis guy, though I've done some looking on occasion. Anyone have thoughts on what to look for when I start my analysis? Kurt
Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.com wrote: I still use it. Violate the rule at your peril. :P Technically speaking, if you're using switches everywhere, you're still following the rule, because every link is its own collision domain. ;-) -- Ben
[NTSysADM] RE: And now, my SSL ignorance....
Trusted root isn't where your cert should go; not sure if that's what IIS is unhappy about though. It should be in the Personal folder under Certificates (Local Computer) Once it's there, restart IIS Manager and it should see it as an available cert. DAMIEN SOLODOW Systems Engineer 317.447.6033 (office) 317.447.6014 (fax) HARRISON COLLEGE From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of David Lum Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 4:18 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: And now, my SSL ignorance Weird...on my dev box I can install the cert via Certificate MMC and drop it into the trusted root store successfully, but the same PFX file will not import into IIS Details: The index value is invalid. Google-Fu fails me From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Damien Solodow Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 12:38 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: And now, my SSL ignorance It's actually easier than you think. :) 1) Install cert (either via IIS or Certificates MMC) 2) Wait for outage; change bindings 3) Pat self on back DAMIEN SOLODOW Systems Engineer 317.447.6033 (office) 317.447.6014 (fax) HARRISON COLLEGE From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of David Lum Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 3:34 PM To: NTSysADM@lists.myITforum.commailto:NTSysADM@lists.myITforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] And now, my SSL ignorance I have an IIS server that currently has a wildcard cert that expires in a few weeks. Due to licensing costs I am to replace this cert with a single web server cert, but am I correct in that I can install SSL certs at any time and the only time they take effect is when you change the SSL binding? * Install cert via IIS * Wait for appropriate service outage to flip certs then bind 443 to the new cert * Reset IIS Amirite? David Lum Sr. Systems Engineer // NWEATM Office 503.548.5229
Re: [NTSysADM] Semi-OT: Network problem
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote: You've done a show log -a on the switch right after the trouble and found nothing helpful, I presume? On the 3400cl, 'show log' says the same as 'sho log -a' - nothing of interest. The -a just tells it to include events from before the last reboot. I threw that in in case you had rebooted trying to clear the trouble. Just that the monitor port has a high collision or drop rate once in a while, and that doesn't correlate with the network interruptions.. I wouldn't *think* port mirroring would need the CPU for anything, but I don't actually know. I'm going to take a look at the packets I've captured first, and see what I can, but HP support might well be the answer. Reason I suggest calling support is they're likely to be able to tell you how to tell exactly what is causing the CPU to spike. They might not solve the root cause problem for you, but that's info you need and don't have. -- Ben
RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more...
Again.what does a Services and Devices company need with a user conference? ;) From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Ryan Finnesey Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 4:11 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... It is very sad. Just when I was happy about MEC they go and do this. Sent from my iPad On Sep 20, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.com mailto:mich...@smithcons.com wrote: I've probably heard the same explanations from the same people you did. All I can say is that it's a damn shame. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Free, Bob Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 1:17 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com mailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... And, I'll just throw this out there for thought: What does a Devices and Services company need with a user conference? Makes me wonder what Dell was thinking when they cancelled TEC. That left a huge gap. Where else could you see most of the strategists, product team, relevant vendors and MVPs for the particular technologies in one place? I've talked to some folks that have gone from NetPro--Quest--Dell employees and some that have left and I've heard the reasoning but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth and no real place for my specific conference/training needs. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 9:34 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com mailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Yep.I'll be there, speaking and running the Windows side of the event. I'd be very interested to get your candid impression after the week. We're evolving the IT Pro side of the event to match the best of MMS and the best of TechEd to supply a conference for the people, by the people instead of a marketing event like they've all turned into these days. So feedback and participation is highly appreciated. And, I'll just throw this out there for thought: What does a Devices and Services company need with a user conference? From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of John Cook Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 12:16 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com mailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Are you going to be at Connections? (or anybody on the list for that matter) I'm set to be there and would welcome the opportunity to meet some of you. John W. Cook Network Operations Manager Partnership For Strong Families 5950 NW 1st Place Gainesville, Fl 32607 Office (352)-244-1610 tel:%28352%29-244-1610 Cell (352) 215-6944 tel:%28352%29%20215-6944 MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS, CompTIA A+, N+, Security+ VSP4, VTSP4 image001.pngimage002.pngimage003.png image004.pngimage005.png From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 11:53 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com mailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Yep.it's true. So, we're moving on. We've actually been prepared to move on for several years, but this year things just fit - just at the right time. It feels like the Seinfeld episode where Jerry just seems to even out know matter what. Loses a $20 bill, finds one in his pocket. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of James Rankin Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:36 AM To: NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.com mailto:NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... http://myitforum.com/myitforumwp/2013/09/16/the-microsoft-management-summit- saying-goodbye-to-a-good-friend/ -- James Rankin Technical Consultant (ACA, CCA, MCTS) http://appsensebigot.blogspot.co.uk _ CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this
Re: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more...
It is very sad. Just when I was happy about MEC they go and do this. Sent from my iPad On Sep 20, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.commailto:mich...@smithcons.com wrote: I’ve probably heard the same explanations from the same people you did. All I can say is that it’s a damn shame. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Free, Bob Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 1:17 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... And, I’ll just throw this out there for thought: What does a Devices and Services company need with a user conference? Makes me wonder what Dell was thinking when they cancelled TEC. That left a huge gap. Where else could you see most of the strategists, product team, relevant vendors and MVPs for the particular technologies in one place? I’ve talked to some folks that have gone from NetPro--Quest--Dell employees and some that have left and I’ve heard the reasoning but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth and no real place for my specific conference/training needs. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 9:34 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Yep…I’ll be there, speaking and running the Windows side of the event. I’d be very interested to get your candid impression after the week. We’re evolving the IT Pro side of the event to match the best of MMS and the best of TechEd to supply a conference for the people, by the people instead of a marketing event like they’ve all turned into these days. So feedback and participation is highly appreciated. And, I’ll just throw this out there for thought: What does a Devices and Services company need with a user conference? From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of John Cook Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 12:16 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Are you going to be at Connections? (or anybody on the list for that matter) I’m set to be there and would welcome the opportunity to meet some of you. John W. Cook Network Operations Manager Partnership For Strong Families 5950 NW 1st Place Gainesville, Fl 32607 Office (352)-244-1610tel:%28352%29-244-1610 Cell (352) 215-6944tel:%28352%29%20215-6944 MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS, CompTIA A+, N+, Security+ VSP4, VTSP4 image001.pngimage002.pngimage003.png image004.pngimage005.png From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 11:53 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Yep…it’s true. So, we’re moving on. We’ve actually been prepared to move on for several years, but this year things just fit – just at the right time. It feels like the Seinfeld episode where Jerry just seems to even out know matter what. Loses a $20 bill, finds one in his pocket. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of James Rankin Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:36 AM To: NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.commailto:NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... http://myitforum.com/myitforumwp/2013/09/16/the-microsoft-management-summit-saying-goodbye-to-a-good-friend/ -- James Rankin Technical Consultant (ACA, CCA, MCTS) http://appsensebigot.blogspot.co.uk CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties. Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. PGE is committed to protecting our customers' privacy. To learn more, please visit http://www.pge.com/about/company/privacy/customer/ inline:
Re: [NTSysADM] Is this domain change, or just DNS play?
I'll lose my membership in the DNS Weenie Club. Can you have concurrent membership in the DNSWC and DNRC? That would be cool :-] -Original Message- From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Ben Scott Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 9:23 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [spam] [dkim-failure] Re: [NTSysADM] Is this domain change, or just DNS play? On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 9:10 AM, David Lum david@nwea.org wrote: We have a development department that wants to do what seems to me to just be DNS hoky-poky. We have and internal domain structure of internaldomain.local, and this group is asking for DNS entries of host1.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local, host2.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local , etc. We don't have to create an actual subdomain to make those kind of DNS entries work, do we? Just create a new DNS zone? You do not need to create a new Active Directory (sub)domain. You don't even need to create a new DNS zone of authority. Just create A resource records for the hostX names. You don't even need to have any resource records for ourdepartment.internaldomain.local. at all. (FYI: Technically all names in DNS are domain names. Even host1.ourdepartment.internaldomain.local. with just an A record is still a domain name. This usually doesn't matter, but as a DNS weenie I have to remark on this, or I'll lose my membership in the DNS Weenie Club. (I get 10% off all my SOA records.)) -- Ben PGE is committed to protecting our customers' privacy. To learn more, please visit http://www.pge.com/about/company/privacy/customer/
RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more...
Becoming a presenter was tough this year. I submitted a number of topics for talks that I thought would be well-received, but I didn't hit the required bar for currently interesting. Most of the speakers I have a very strong respect for. So I think you should be able to get some good sessions. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of John Cook Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 5:35 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... I was sorry to see you're not presenting :( John W. Cook Network Operations Manager Partnership For Strong Families 5950 NW 1st Place Gainesville, Fl 32607 Office (352) 244-1610 Cell (352) 215-6944 MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS, CompTIA A+, N+, Security+ VSP4, VTSP4 From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Michael B. Smith Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 1:52 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... I've probably heard the same explanations from the same people you did. All I can say is that it's a damn shame. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Free, Bob Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 1:17 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... And, I'll just throw this out there for thought: What does a Devices and Services company need with a user conference? Makes me wonder what Dell was thinking when they cancelled TEC. That left a huge gap. Where else could you see most of the strategists, product team, relevant vendors and MVPs for the particular technologies in one place? I've talked to some folks that have gone from NetPro--Quest--Dell employees and some that have left and I've heard the reasoning but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth and no real place for my specific conference/training needs. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 9:34 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Yep...I'll be there, speaking and running the Windows side of the event. I'd be very interested to get your candid impression after the week. We're evolving the IT Pro side of the event to match the best of MMS and the best of TechEd to supply a conference for the people, by the people instead of a marketing event like they've all turned into these days. So feedback and participation is highly appreciated. And, I'll just throw this out there for thought: What does a Devices and Services company need with a user conference? From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of John Cook Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 12:16 PM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Are you going to be at Connections? (or anybody on the list for that matter) I'm set to be there and would welcome the opportunity to meet some of you. John W. Cook Network Operations Manager Partnership For Strong Families 5950 NW 1st Place Gainesville, Fl 32607 Office (352)-244-1610tel:%28352%29-244-1610 Cell (352) 215-6944tel:%28352%29%20215-6944 MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS, CompTIA A+, N+, Security+ VSP4, VTSP4 [MCP_SE_c][MCTS][top_banner] [VMLOGO_VTSP_S_Q208][sales_prof_B] From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Rod Trent Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 11:53 AM To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.commailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... Yep...it's true. So, we're moving on. We've actually been prepared to move on for several years, but this year things just fit - just at the right time. It feels like the Seinfeld episode where Jerry just seems to even out know matter what. Loses a $20 bill, finds one in his pocket. From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.commailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of James Rankin Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:36 AM To: NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.commailto:NTSysADM@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] I see MMS is no more... http://myitforum.com/myitforumwp/2013/09/16/the-microsoft-management-summit-saying-goodbye-to-a-good-friend/ -- James Rankin Technical Consultant (ACA, CCA, MCTS) http://appsensebigot.blogspot.co.uk CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may
Re: [NTSysADM] Aduc Admin +
Looks like a bolt-on RBAC for AD. Reasonably priced looks like. Have you downloaded the trial yet? - WJR On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Richard Stovall rich...@gmail.com wrote: Anyone out there have any experience with this tool? http://aducadmin.com
[NTSysADM] Change control....GPO
For you guys with a pretty well defined change control process - are incremental GPO changes (in this case we have a GPO that controls IE's trusted sites, I want to add enable auto logon with current credentials for sites in trusted sites) reviewed by people before the change? I'm thinking in larger environments it might be submitted by one person, reviewed and approved by another but not necessarily held until a formal change request meeting is convened? Normally I'd just whip this change out, but I need to think about the accountability process in general. David Lum Sr. Systems Engineer // NWEATM Office 503.548.5229
