seawolf

What I meant was that it sounded like the assumption is that VLAN = Physical LAN, which it does not (therefore the VIRTUAL in VLAN). I think this has caused the problems with the supplier for the "LAN extension". They assumed VLANs meant VLANs and not two physical LANs. The customer and the vendor weren't speaking the same language.

It sounds to me like you might have "wireless client isolation" turned on for the WLAN (Configure > WLANs) in ZoneDirector.

I think you may be confused about the difference between subnets and VLANs. Anyhow, you only need 1 LAN to have two VLANs. We have one LAN and 30 VLANs. It sounds as if you wanted two fibre cables (I assume fibre, maybe a Microwave link?) run to the other site for two separate networks. That would be more expensive than running one cable and using a switch on the other end to handle the VLANs, except I don't think you have VLANs, but actual two separate networks, therefore your problem. If the contract said they would run two links then you shouldn't pay until you get two links. Although, I'm still a bit confused with the way your talking about VLANs, so maybe I'm misunderstanding.

You did bind the Mac server to the AD domain and you installed WGM for 10.8 and followed that part of the instructions? If its still not working I don't know. Without seeing it myself it could be a bit of the needle in a haystack.

I'm not sure I would put the SG-300s in the same category as the HP ProCurve 5406zl or 2901al that are being discussed. They don't run Cisco IOS and are rebadged Linksys as far as I'm aware although with a Cisco web GUI (no CLI last I checked). I've heard both good and bad about the SG-300s. Good in that they seem to be solid and reliable, but bad in configuration around VLANs and more advanced setups. I haven't used the Cisco small business switches for a couple of years though so maybe my knowledge is out of date. In not sure what the HPs cost in Alabama, but here in OZ the 5406zl comes in around 12k and 2910al is bit under 3k. Of course everything is more expensive here than the states - including Australian wine! Figure that one out...

Make sure you've set it up as indicated here http://www.krypted.com/?p=7619 Krypted is a good source of info for many things Mac.

There are a few ways you can go with this and what you do depends on how many Mac clients you will have, how much money you have to spend, and how much you want to learn about managing Macs. If you have only either a few clients or more money than time to learn, then you can just use Centrify (http://www.centrify.com/directcontrol/mac_os_x.asp) or AdmitMac (http://www.thursby.com/products/admitmac.html) and manage the Macs pretty much just like you do your Windows clients using GPOs. You'll still need to create separate GPOs for the Macs, but it will be familiar and relatively painless. These solutions aren't cheap for large numbers of Macs though. If you have more time than money, then you should use a Mac Mini server and WorkGroup Manager (WGM) or Profile Manager. If you use profiles then you just bind the Macs straight to the Domain Server for authentication and use profiles for management. In between these two options cost-wise is Casper Suite, which can do everything from imaging, package deployment, policies, profiles and more. CS is like SCCM and a bit more for Macs. JAMF offers excellent pricing for Education on the licensing, but there is the upfront one time JumpStart. Whatever you use for management (unless its CS), you'll still need an imaging tool, but you can use the built-in NetInstall service on a Mac Mini running the server app (http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5599) or the excellent and free DeployStudio (http://www.deploystudio.com/Home.html)

I haven't used NetApp SANs so I can't really comment, which is why I asked. If it lasted for more than 8 years without a single fault then one can't really complain when it does pack it in - nothing is bulletproof. Although I once had two Sun Netra servers that had been going for 14 years with nothing more than an annual reboot and maintenance (cleaning). Those things just didn't want to die...

Any specific reason? I like to hear what people have experienced with other vendors and the reasons why they like (or don't like) what they are using.

Scorptec can offer you some advice in regards to sizing of the solution to fit requirements. I would certainly place both admin and curriculum servers on the same domain, but you might want to isolate them on different VLANS and not allow curriculum clients to access the Admin VLAN clients or server. This would require using different file servers for Admin and Curriculum, but if you're talking VM servers then you wouldn't really have any extra cost except for the server license and the Admin server would need much RAM or CPU cores with only a few clients accessing it. If you're security and file permissions are setup right even that is not an absolute necessity, but if you want to be extra safe... Windows Server 2012 has several new features that would be useful to you, mostly around HyperV. As always, it's not what new features are available in the new whatever, but what new features will you actually use and will make a meaningful impact. http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/10-things/10-compelling-reasons-to-upgrade-to-windows-server-2012/ That said, you can expect 2008R2 to be around for quite some time...

Not really, but you might be able to get a few bucks for them on eBay. Might not be worth the effort though.

You didn't say what brand switches you currently have or what knowledge you have in-house or have easy access to (Cisco, HP, etc.) However, value for money in Education I would go for an HP Procurve solution. Based on the number of clients and students you have, I would recommend a 5406zl modular switch for your core and 2910s for edge switches. This will give you Gigabit speeds for clients and the ability now or in the future to use 10GbE uplinks from the core to edge switches. Your budget is the limiting factor here and I would ask for more money for your network infrastructure. I would bet you have as much or more invested than this in your Aerohive WiFi network than you've been given for your core switching infrastructure, which is a bad idea. It's like giving a $1,000 car a $5,000 paint job.

Yep, this works just fine. Connecting Windows clients or Xerox photocopiers to the SMBX shares on a 10.7 or 10.8 server on the other hand doesn't work so well (or at all) in all of our testing.

Do you have support on the 7110? It would have still been eligible and support wouldn't have cost much ($600 per annum maybe). If not, then I have just finished testing several SAN units including the HP P4000s, Sun (Oracle) 7120 and 7320, and XI Systems SANs. I would stay away from the Drobo for anything other than backup storage or as an emergency SAN. They are a toy in the SAN space and I wouldn't trust them with my critical VM infrastructure. The best value for money of the systems I've used or tested in recent hears would be the XI Systems units, which run on FreeNAS and use SuperMicro chassis. You can order them configured with SATA or SAS drives and SSD read and write caches. They'll build something pretty much to your specs and budget. The interface is good and they provide iSCSI, NFS, SMB, and AFP services. The performance of these isn't as good as the Sun units, but it is as good or better than the HPs. The HPs were fine and they aren't overly expensive, but performance was limited as they they typically run in RAID5/6 and had no SSD write cache. They also have a very unintuitive and complex interface compared to Sun or XI Systems units and are not expandable. To get more capacity you have to buy another one. Consultants also typically recommend purchasing two for performance and redundancy. These units tested fine, but were just too limiting to me with no upside. Buying another one whenever I needed performance or capacity improvements just didn't excite me. The Sun 7120 had great performance for the cost. It is a big upgrade from the 7110. The 7320 is on a whole other level than any of the other SANs I've tested. Fantastic performance, expandability, and ease of setup (if you're already familiar with Fishworks and even if you're not). I ended up buying the 7320 after several months of demoing several SANs. I was going to buy a 7120, but Oracle had an EOFY deal going that made the 7320 only 10% more expensive than a similarly equipped 7120. I ordered mine with 2 x Zeus write caches. The performance is unreal. It's going to be even better when I hook it up to a couple of new servers over 10GbE in a couple of months.

As you were then. You obviously have it all figured out. I'll leave you to it and take my "word salad" with me. Cheers.

But seriously, if you can only justify expenditure with proof then there are only two things money in education should be spent on - more and better teachers, and the building and maintenance of the school's basic infrastructure. I've seen no definitive proof that computers improve any aspect of learning, other than computer skills. Therefore, the only use computers should have at a school is in a computer class. The students have to hand write the answers to their exams anyway...

Moscow isn't in Spain? Well I'll be a...

Good question. Tell me how you would measure the performance of a nurse, cop, or firefighter? Low rate of patient deaths, number of arrests, number of fires put out? Or is it something more complex than that? Good judgements must be made using both the qualitative and quantitative. When people try to reduce everything to a simple statistic or quantitative measure they lose all ability to make sound judgements. Life is far more complicated than that. Good teachers and parents will know when students are achieving these things based on all of the time they spend with them. Correlation does not imply causation. Have you ever considered that perhaps a University degree has just become the new "High School Diploma" or in other words, the job market has become so competitive that students have no choice, but to continue on to University. Not because they want to, but because they have to in order to get a decent job. And it's putting a lot of young people in debt. http://m.slashdot.org/story/182395 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/business/college-degree-required-by-increasing-number-of-companies.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 The UK education system must be doing great then. Congratulations on your success. I can only speak from my own experiences, observations, and knowledge of the US and Australian education systems.

Agreed. Good quality refurb gear is a viable option. Gear is a bit more expensive here in OZ though.

I suppose I have a different perspective on this. We DO have to pay for textbooks here. It's still the same in the states I believe. Many employers are going BYOD and not supplying computers or phones to staff, that will become more the norm as time goes on. The problem with the 'bring anything' idea in schools though is that there are many devices that just aren't practical or workable in a school environment, and the more diverse the devices the more capable the IT systems, IT staff, and teachers need to be to cope with it. That increases costs for systems, staff, and training. And it's not as if the devices required by schools can ONLY be used for schoolwork. Whereas, textbooks can only be used for school, or as a very expensive paperweight.

Until it happens right during report writing time or they are unable to communicate with parents during an emergency and aren't prepared with a paper based backup to deal with such contingencies. No, they'll just blame you. Our job is to convince the execs why taking that position is a bad one. Here's an idea. Imagine you pulled the plug for a day or three? Just what wouldn't the school be able to do, what would they still be able to do? Write a risk assessment showing the impacts that would actually occur, include worst-case scenarios. Present that to the execs and watch them squirm as reality hits them of what the impacts are. If you determine the impacts are low, fine. For us, they would be serious and crippling. The more you use technology at a school the more dependent you are on it.

How about looking at the students overall wellbeing, their engagement and desire to learn? Creating critical and creative thinkers with a real lifelong love of learning should be the real goal. Too many students just do only what is necessary and as soon as they can get out of school are happily resigned to never attend any sort of class or pick up a book for the purpose of learning anything ever again. They hated school and have no desire to approach anything that looks like school or learning ever again. Better grades too often don't demonstrate better engagement or desire for learning, but can just be a byproduct of more pressure being out on teachers and students, incentives for performance being introduced (monetary or otherwise), a lowering of standards, or simply cheating by the students or the school itself to increase funding.

Yes, might as well just perpetuate bad decisions. No use in resisting it for the students sake I suppose.

Crossing fingers is not a good strategy. It's all good until (not if) it goes down, then you'll have to pay the piper. Speaking from 20 years experience here.

I have had servers fail, and top quality ones at that. It does happen. Not everything on a server is redundant and nothing is bullet proof. The 4hr response time does little good if the part you need isn't in stock in the country. I had a SAN logic board pack it in earlier this year and they had to fly the only logic board available for it in country from Perth (3,400 km). Te best RAID or UPS won't help you there, and even RAID can fail you (I've seen it). I do agree with the P2V, I would be reluctant to do that and would suggest a fresh build. I wouldn't do it on 2012 though, and I wouldn't do it on 2012 R2 until its been out for a couple of months. Personally I would go with the tried and true 2008 R2, but there are some advantages with 2012 for you in a small environment with HyperV.