I just want to confirm, the general idea is that the DHCP server is static, and EVERYTHING else is just a reservation?

I was experiencing some weird time sync issues. I tracked it down, and apparently we never had any external NTP source setup for the PDCe to use. Hopefully that is now fixed and the issues will go away.

@scottalanmiller said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

@Donahue said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

@scottalanmiller said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

@Donahue said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

@scottalanmiller said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

@Donahue said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

So apple is not operating like a swap meet, that has been established. It is operating like a consignment store?

No, it is operating like a normal store. There is no non-normal store involved here. Consignment is a swap meet with hired oversight. This is nothing like that. It's like Amazon or Walmart.

That is your position, and I agree. But if apple chose to take the position of a consignment store, would that change their options for defense? Do consignment stores offer any protections to them that regular stores don't have?

Apple can't just choose to defend themselves as something that they are not, though. The products there are not on consignment, so that would just land them in contempt of court.

Apple can choose to do whatever they want. It may not be legal or wise, but they could. I was just trying to explore that possibility.

Sure, but once we go into "they can just lie about it", the sky is the limit. They could claim that the customer doesn't exist, the app doesn't exist, heck, that Apple doesn't even exist.

They are in fact claiming that the customer doesn't exist.

@DustinB3403 said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Dashrender said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@DustinB3403 said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Dashrender said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

Ok, DHCP is switched over. It's currently just pointing the DNS to the existing DNS servers.

Right. Now you can work on setting up your DHCP reservation, and migrating all the static IP junk to reservations.

Once that is done, you can work towards changing DNS.

yeah, that will take awhile.

really? Your DHCP server doesn't have an option to just add an existing lease to the reservation table?

It's easy to create reservations. It's another thing entirely to migrate over devices from static to DHCP, while also changing their ip.

You could just create reservations in the new DHCP server and have the existing windows DHCP server not renew requests.

He's changing static IP'ed devices to DHCP with reservations.

Are you agreeing with me or stating something Donohue is doing?

he's telling you what I need to do.

@DustinB3403 said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Dashrender said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

Ok, DHCP is switched over. It's currently just pointing the DNS to the existing DNS servers.

Right. Now you can work on setting up your DHCP reservation, and migrating all the static IP junk to reservations.

Once that is done, you can work towards changing DNS.

yeah, that will take awhile.

really? Your DHCP server doesn't have an option to just add an existing lease to the reservation table?

It's easy to create reservations. It's another thing entirely to migrate over devices from static to DHCP, while also changing their ip.

You could just create reservations in the new DHCP server and have the existing windows DHCP server not renew requests.

I think you missed the point.

@Dashrender said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

Ok, DHCP is switched over. It's currently just pointing the DNS to the existing DNS servers.

Right. Now you can work on setting up your DHCP reservation, and migrating all the static IP junk to reservations.

Once that is done, you can work towards changing DNS.

yeah, that will take awhile.

really? Your DHCP server doesn't have an option to just add an existing lease to the reservation table?

It's easy to create reservations. It's another thing entirely to migrate over devices from static to DHCP, while also changing their ip.

@scottalanmiller said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

@Donahue said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

@scottalanmiller said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

@Donahue said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

So apple is not operating like a swap meet, that has been established. It is operating like a consignment store?

No, it is operating like a normal store. There is no non-normal store involved here. Consignment is a swap meet with hired oversight. This is nothing like that. It's like Amazon or Walmart.

That is your position, and I agree. But if apple chose to take the position of a consignment store, would that change their options for defense? Do consignment stores offer any protections to them that regular stores don't have?

Apple can't just choose to defend themselves as something that they are not, though. The products there are not on consignment, so that would just land them in contempt of court.

Apple can choose to do whatever they want. It may not be legal or wise, but they could. I was just trying to explore that possibility.

@scottalanmiller said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

@Donahue said in How Apple hopes to stop a customer lawsuit over its App Store monopoly:

So apple is not operating like a swap meet, that has been established. It is operating like a consignment store?

No, it is operating like a normal store. There is no non-normal store involved here. Consignment is a swap meet with hired oversight. This is nothing like that. It's like Amazon or Walmart.

That is your position, and I agree. But if apple chose to take the position of a consignment store, would that change their options for defense? Do consignment stores offer any protections to them that regular stores don't have?

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

Ok, DHCP is switched over. It's currently just pointing the DNS to the existing DNS servers.

Right. Now you can work on setting up your DHCP reservation, and migrating all the static IP junk to reservations.

Once that is done, you can work towards changing DNS.

yeah, that will take awhile.

Ok, DHCP is switched over. It's currently just pointing the DNS to the existing DNS servers.

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@scottalanmiller said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

its the device or user making the request to the DNS service.

The only device making a request to the Windows DNS service is the other DNS server.

Correct, but that's not the basis for the licensing requirement. Anything that uses that DNS downstream is getting it from an "agregator" to the Windows service and therefore needs the CAL.

If that is the actual term of theri license, then, yet another reason to move on to this with the target of getting to no AD agian.

agreed

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

its the device or user making the request to the DNS service.

The only device making a request to the Windows DNS service is the other DNS server.

let me rephrase this to make sure I understand what you are saying. Setup the router to act as the DNS server, with a forwarder to the windows DNS, as opposed to simply putting the windows DNS ip into the settings handed out by DHCP?

@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@Donahue said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

I wonder what else I am hosting from windows 10 breaks this clause then. Unifi? Various license servers for CAD? FM audit? Predator DNC?

You simply can't use Windows desktops as if they were cheap servers.

I agree that this is probably the point.

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Dashrender said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Dashrender said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

You need to have your DNS use your AD server as it's forwarder, but everything else can look at your DNS.

How will this affect licensing? Do you only need one CAL for that DNS server, since it's the only thing actually talking to the server? Interesting work-around to MS licensing.

I believe that MS believes that ANY device that gets info that is passed along using DNS requires a CAL. It doesn't matter who hosts the DHCP, if it is still point to MS DNS.

Right - JB's got a kinda work around though.

PC asks router for DNS
Router asks Windows for DNS

In this setup that JB suggests only this one box - the router ever talks to windows DNS, so.... you only need one CAL for that router.

I dont believe this is compliant still. I believe that MS would argue that any device that make a DNS request through that DNS server requires a CAL. It's a grey area at best.

It is a single device CAL for the DNS server. Many users (not devices) are requesting DNS from the DNS server (a device).

the DNS server does not require a CAL, its the device or user making the request to the DNS service.

I wonder what else I am hosting from windows 10 breaks this clause then. Unifi? Various license servers for CAD? FM audit? Predator DNC?

@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@Donahue said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@DustinB3403 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@Donahue said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@Donahue said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

I am so confused.

@Dashrender can you produce a link that says that SQL is limited to 10 connections when hosted from windows 10? It sounds like you are claiming this, and I don't believe it.

It's in the EULA and is both a technical limit as well as a licensing limit. Also, SQL hosted from Windows 10 has other license issues if used like a server beyond the hard limits.

can you guys explain more? I am unfamiliar with what you guys are trying to tell me. @scottalanmiller which EULA, windows 10 or SQL?

In the End User Licence Agreement, exist a clause that says you won't use a Microsoft Desktop platform to provide hosted services to more than X people.

(more or less)

And that you must purchase Microsoft Server and CALs if you need to host services above the stated limit.

Found it. From here, section 2.d.(iii)

2.c. is more important. That's the part that forbids SQL Server completely, even with just one connection. The 10 connection limit is only for allowed services. Since SQL is forbidden, that is the overriding factor.

section v?

@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@Donahue said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

I am so confused.

@Dashrender can you produce a link that says that SQL is limited to 10 connections when hosted from windows 10? It sounds like you are claiming this, and I don't believe it.

It's in the EULA and is both a technical limit as well as a licensing limit. Also, SQL hosted from Windows 10 has other license issues if used like a server beyond the hard limits.

@Donahue - do you still need a link to the EULA or are a few others agreeing with me enough? serious here, not trying to be a dick.

see my post above yours

@Dashrender said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Dashrender said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@JaredBusch said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

You need to have your DNS use your AD server as it's forwarder, but everything else can look at your DNS.

How will this affect licensing? Do you only need one CAL for that DNS server, since it's the only thing actually talking to the server? Interesting work-around to MS licensing.

I believe that MS believes that ANY device that gets info that is passed along using DNS requires a CAL. It doesn't matter who hosts the DHCP, if it is still point to MS DNS.

Right - JB's got a kinda work around though.

PC asks router for DNS
Router asks Windows for DNS

In this setup that JB suggests only this one box - the router ever talks to windows DNS, so.... you only need one CAL for that router.

I dont believe this is compliant still. I believe that MS would argue that any device that make a DNS request through that DNS server requires a CAL. It's a grey area at best.

@Dashrender said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@Donahue said in Where do I start with replacing the whole MS AD stack:

@DustinB3403 and @JaredBusch agreed on both points.

I'm sorry, there's nothing quoted - so I'm not sure what points you're talking about?

the two posts immediately above that one.

@DustinB3403 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@Donahue said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

@Donahue said in What Are You Doing Right Now:

I am so confused.

@Dashrender can you produce a link that says that SQL is limited to 10 connections when hosted from windows 10? It sounds like you are claiming this, and I don't believe it.

It's in the EULA and is both a technical limit as well as a licensing limit. Also, SQL hosted from Windows 10 has other license issues if used like a server beyond the hard limits.

can you guys explain more? I am unfamiliar with what you guys are trying to tell me. @scottalanmiller which EULA, windows 10 or SQL?

In the End User Licence Agreement, exist a clause that says you won't use a Microsoft Desktop platform to provide hosted services to more than X people.

(more or less)

And that you must purchase Microsoft Server and CALs if you need to host services above the stated limit.

Found it. From here, section 2.d.(iii)

You may allow up to 20 other devices to access the software installed on the licensed device for the purpose of using the following software features: file services, print services...

It doesnt mention database connections, but it would logically fit here.