GrumbleDook Posted February 23, 2009 Author Posted February 23, 2009 *sigh* I don't know ... I hope you put down the look at deployment tools I'll ask if there is a way to send the info out.
sparkeh Posted February 24, 2009 Posted February 24, 2009 I hope you put down the look at deployment tools Its possible
kmount Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Yes you will :] I'll be the one wearing ... well, a shirt and tie like most of the other people there.
russdev Posted March 10, 2009 Posted March 10, 2009 Just a quick thank you to embc find the day very useful also edugeek got mentioned several times in number of sessions. Once by director of embc in his session to everyone as example of good practice of building a community (video to come soon). Russ
kmount Posted March 10, 2009 Posted March 10, 2009 Aye; was good to put a few faces to names today and Tony'll be proud of me, I even behaved! :]
kmount Posted March 10, 2009 Posted March 10, 2009 Lots of stuff, presentations and video's will turn up shortly no doubt :]
sparkeh Posted March 11, 2009 Posted March 11, 2009 Aye; was good to put a few faces to names today and Tony'll be proud of me, I even behaved! :] Oh I kept an eye out all day for you, was gonna say hello. Guess you sneaked under the radar Yes it was a good day all told. Hopefully these will become a regular event.
kmount Posted March 11, 2009 Posted March 11, 2009 You didn't see me? Pfft, which sessions did you attend?
sparkeh Posted March 11, 2009 Posted March 11, 2009 You didn't see me? Pfft, which sessions did you attend? *Trawls memory* Er...Optimising Network, Network Security, Deployment Tools and FITS (would have noticed you there as there was only three of us in it!)
kmount Posted March 11, 2009 Posted March 11, 2009 Ah; didn't collide in any of those :] I was in Network Security, VC, Filtering and then Deployment Tools.
robk Posted March 11, 2009 Posted March 11, 2009 Anyone else suprised/worried about the discussion of the old fujitsu firewall rules in the network security talk? I hate to think whats been open to the world on ports I thought were firewalled! (Though I do apply the usual disable anything you don`t need on an externally facing server, how often is something missed.) RobK
kmount Posted March 11, 2009 Posted March 11, 2009 Yes, concerning indeed but can understand their position on it. I have since spoken with the chap who did the session and am going to update all firewall rules for my public IPs (I have 11 or 12 now) to lock it down as far as possible. Does also make me wonder about whether to introduce an internal firewall box in routed mode and a nat box with the printers/etc on a 192.168 subnet to free up some IPs thus avoiding needing to bridge two subnets on the lan.
sparkeh Posted March 11, 2009 Posted March 11, 2009 Anyone else suprised/worried about the discussion of the old fujitsu firewall rules in the network security talk? I hate to think whats been open to the world on ports I thought were firewalled! Yes that was an eye opener. Still not that surprising I guess.
kmount Posted March 11, 2009 Posted March 11, 2009 Network security talk - I thought it was a rant! Completely understand where he was coming from though; that must have been a nightmare for them to fathom out. However, showing us the network schematics etc pleased me as it showed they knew what they were doing!
russdev Posted March 11, 2009 Posted March 11, 2009 Completely understand where he was coming from though; that must have been a nightmare for them to fathom out. However, showing us the network schematics etc pleased me as it showed they knew what they were doing! Don't even get me started on that one I was in second session of that. In my view talked about ip rules for way to long and when it got to network security just before he ran out of time I wasn't impressed was on about the same tied thing that we need to move away from not reinforce. Russ
sparkeh Posted March 12, 2009 Posted March 12, 2009 Kinda have to agree with Russ on this one. Seems odd to listen to Becta telling us about the future of having pupils using the same devices both at home and school, then listening to Synetrix telling us not to let people connect their equipment to our networks. Think this highlights the difference in thinking that between the those solely involved in education and those that come from a corporate background. Hopefully as time goes on this difference can be reduced, and to be honest I think that this is happening.
SpuffMonkey Posted March 12, 2009 Posted March 12, 2009 Don't even get me started on that one I was in second session of that. In my view talked about ip rules for way to long and when it got to network security just before he ran out of time I wasn't impressed was on about the same tied thing that we need to move away from not reinforce. Russ Agree with you there Russ - too much history in that session. I didn't think they pitched the level correctly - if you invite technical people to a technical seminar - I'd have liked a bit more in depth meat to the sessions, rather than the somewhat bland overviews that most of them seemed to be.
GrumbleDook Posted March 12, 2009 Author Posted March 12, 2009 Perhaps break down the sessions into 101, 201 and 301 style? Also remember that the conference had a range of people there because there are a range of levels that schools are supported at. Not everyone needs to understand IPSEC and QoS /CoS ... and for some of you, you will get bored talking about password complexity differences between key stages. I hope you all put these comments onto your feedback forms. Failing that there is always [email protected] to give more feedback.
SpuffMonkey Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 Perhaps break down the sessions into 101, 201 and 301 style? Also remember that the conference had a range of people there because there are a range of levels that schools are supported at. Not everyone needs to understand IPSEC and QoS /CoS ... and for some of you, you will get bored talking about password complexity differences between key stages. I hope you all put these comments onto your feedback forms. Failing that there is always [email protected] to give more feedback. Yes - that sounds like an idea - I did put this on the feedback form - even though there wasn't really a space to do it by each topic.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now