Reputation
1,265
Top tag
Next privilege 2,000 Rep.
Edit questions and answers
Badges
3 31 65
Impact
~229k people reached

Mar
26
comment Is it bad that latency for our internal LAN varies greatly within the 15 - 40 ms range?
I do have a QoS rule set to discriminate between voice and data traffic on our network... I'm posting this above.
Mar
26
asked Is it bad that latency for our internal LAN varies greatly within the 15 - 40 ms range?
Mar
14
accepted Risk involved in converting basic to dynamic disk in Windows Server 2003 (and R2)
Mar
14
comment Risk involved in converting basic to dynamic disk in Windows Server 2003 (and R2)
@MDMarra you make a good point... this system has not been patched in a while. Ok, I'll do this. So the quickest route is to boot from image and run Diskpart?
Mar
14
comment Risk involved in converting basic to dynamic disk in Windows Server 2003 (and R2)
@MathiasR.Jessen, yes, I am. That is probably why the volume cannot be extended, I'm guessing
Mar
14
comment Risk involved in converting basic to dynamic disk in Windows Server 2003 (and R2)
Ah I just read your entire post. This system is a critical one so it cannot go down for a reboot to a setup ISO.
Mar
14
revised Risk involved in converting basic to dynamic disk in Windows Server 2003 (and R2)
added 42 characters in body
Mar
14
comment Risk involved in converting basic to dynamic disk in Windows Server 2003 (and R2)
I tried this before, but I got The volume you have selected may not be extended. Please select another volume and try again.
Mar
14
comment Risk involved in converting basic to dynamic disk in Windows Server 2003 (and R2)
The volume you have selected may not be extended. Please select another volume and try again.
Mar
14
asked Risk involved in converting basic to dynamic disk in Windows Server 2003 (and R2)
Mar
13
revised No names resolve in new BIND installation - wondering if issue is that BIND cannot resolve the NS
added 700 characters in body
Mar
13
comment No names resolve in new BIND installation - wondering if issue is that BIND cannot resolve the NS
Posted the results of dig @localhost emprod ns
Mar
12
revised No names resolve in new BIND installation - wondering if issue is that BIND cannot resolve the NS
deleted 15 characters in body
Mar
12
revised No names resolve in new BIND installation - wondering if issue is that BIND cannot resolve the NS
added 1574 characters in body
Mar
12
comment No names resolve in new BIND installation - wondering if issue is that BIND cannot resolve the NS
Authoritative... please let me know which config I should post. I'll start posting some now.
Mar
12
asked No names resolve in new BIND installation - wondering if issue is that BIND cannot resolve the NS
Mar
12
comment Can I use my pfSense WAN IP as public IP for 1:1 NAT? What about port forwarding?
Ok - so basically, for every pfSense in your CARP subnet you are going to need to reserve a public IP (if you want failover to work).
Mar
12
asked Can I use my pfSense WAN IP as public IP for 1:1 NAT? What about port forwarding?
Mar
9
comment Fresh CentOS 6.2 / Ubuntu Server Installation on VMWare ESXi - can connect to LAN net but not Internet
Yes, well in Advanced Outbound NAT, the address was set to 10.2.1.1, which was asinine of me. I changed this value to Interface Address as well as CARP shared address, and both worked. Basically, it wanted a WAN address to use there and I was giving it a local address
Mar
9
comment Fresh CentOS 6.2 / Ubuntu Server Installation on VMWare ESXi - can connect to LAN net but not Internet
Thank you Max. The bounty is yours. In my CARP setup, I had a LAN address set for my advanced outbound NAT LAN-to-WAN rule rather than Interface address or another CARP address. Changing it fixed everything.