barryfl

Load time is much better! Nice work!

Easier, maybe, but it’s a BIG step back. As has been mentioned it’s such a flawed "security" mechanism. I certainly wouldn't be forgetting WPA anytime soon.

The Register just covered this: The Register Story Barry

Afternoon All, Just wondered if anyone here had ever managed to script wireless settings. I want to create a deployment script but by the looks of it I don't think you can do it. Any ideas? Barry **Mods - Needs a move to scripts - My bad**

Hi everyone. Now i'm going to try and explain this as best I can and if I miss any info out please do ask. I have a HP Managed switch in my school. Our current network is on the default VLAN out of the box. I now need to create a seperate VLAN and a few machines on a 192 network with its own DNS and DHCP server. I created a new VLAN and tagged the ports I wanted to use and put in the server but when I activated the DHCP server it started acting as the authoritive DHCP server for my default VLAN. This hands out 192 addresses to everthing which is VERY VERY BAD. If I use manual IP's the whole setup works fine but this won't be practical for the use of this setup I guess what im asking here is if anyone can point me in the right direction, Is there some sort of broadcast forward happening? The switch I am using to do this is a HP 4108GL with the latest firmware and I am using M0n0wall as the DHCP and DNS server. Regards, Barry

Welcome to my world.

Hmm we have big issues with LM since the last upgrade, seeing similar errors not this one I don't think. We worked around it by killing the LM process, deleting the LessonMonitor.MDB and TempTables.Mdb then re-launching LM Might help, Might not but thats my 2 pence Regards, Barry

Hi everyone, Another HGFL specific issue and this time around its email from Outlook 2003 ouside the grid. Can pick them up but can't seem to send them. Not just me having the problem from our school. Have the correct settings (I think) Incoming: imail.school.herts.sch.uk Sending: post.schoolname.herts.sch.uk Seem to get an "Unable to connect to outgoing SMTP server, Contact the administrator" Just me being stupid and not putting a setting in? or do we all have this problem? Regards, Barry

Well now we seem to be getting somewhere. We've done a few calls to some places today and would like to thank everyone at this point for allowing us to call you. I know how busy everyone must be. We can (Dare I say) call inside of our Grid (Multiple times without neededing to reboot) and I think i'm right in saying can get calls from outside the grid but not make them using E164 numbers but I am checking that. Still have a funny issue whereby I have to reboot inbetween each call to an E164 outside the grid otherwise I get a User Not Responding but I have no idea whats causing that and shall be what I work on more 2mozo. Its all good fun in the end, But not as easy as it could be? Baz

Hi All, Is there anyone else here who has VC kit and is within the HGFL (Herts Grid For Learning) at the moment? If you are, get in touch as we’re trying to work out if we are the only ones having a few issues at the moment. If you are in a different location outside of the HFGL and would like to be a contact for test calls and such a like it would also be great to hear from you. Baz

Its very interesting, Different people have very different ways of doing this. For example, A college just down the road do it the public way so they can administer from anywhere. I also think industry sets these sorts of things up in the same way. I prefer the public way because that’s the way I was taught. My NM is set in her way, and I am sure she as her reasons for it so I am not going to challenge anymore. I guess when I am a NM someday I can make these types of decisions my way. Thanks to all that posted. Barry

lol you don't have to tell me that, I have been saying this since....well....forever. Using that subnet mask isn't exactly standard. Even the link to that subnet calc reports that 'Note: 192.168.3.100 is a class C IP address and is normally used with a subnet mask of type 255.255.255.x' Im glad it chucks stranges things out at you too. I have always been taught to follow standards. Otherwise things slip. Thanks for your input at this stupid time of night. I need my sleep too Night All Barry

Great, Thanks for that. Security was a valid argument that i can understand but figured that the router/firewall should have been configured by the LEA to make this schools seeing other schools kit a non-issue. Further, I always password protect my devices when setting them up (And document the config) How do you keep track of what printer has which IP? Manually? Or have you setup something in DHCP (Like a scope with reservations for the 192.x.x range)? Do you agree that 255.255.252.0 is an invalid subnet mask for a class C address therefore I would have to change that aspect? Regards, Barry

Thanks Chris, It is indeed Barry

Yup, This has been exactly my point, So i clearly have a valid point when i say that moving it to the public range is the most technically valid thing to do. Remember im looking to prove my point to management because they believe it has been done this way by RM on purpose and that it should stay this way. My point is i don't have any way of: A) Managing the devices from anything but the server B) See what device has what IP address as its not reserved anywhere / documented C) The subnet mask for that Class C address is not valid which is probs why the web interface is a bit hit and miss from the server i try to configure it on Im looking for people to back me up here really. Am i making more sense? Cheers, Barry

Spot On

Hey Everyone Found a great bit of software for looking at network traffic. Open source to which is great. Put it on one of our servers for testing today and gives a break down of so much. Anyway. Hope it helps you as much as its helped me Barry

OK. Sorry i haven't posted on this recently (FR Died Monday and have been busy with RM trying to get the thing fixed) I don't think i have explained myself fully enough here. Firstly i should state that yes that is a typo in my diagram with the client IP and the proxy IP (I was very tired) Now let me try and give this another go. All of our Printers are on a 192.168.1.xxx (xxx being a number between 100 and 200) the subnet mask for this is 255.255.252.0. Now That subnet mask isn't valid according to what i know and also from double checking with the boson IPSubnetter tool it says that subnet mask is a class B mask (Also says supernetting) Our network IP address range comes from the LEA. We have no control over this. As without it we can't use the grid (The internet). The server has dual IP address configured on its NIC so that we can use it to manage the printers VIA web interface (You can't do this on any other machine except the server because the address isn't in the range of any of the clients hence the dual IP config on the server) Now surely it makes more sense to put our printers on our LEA assigned IP address range and set allocations in DHCP for them? That way we have a central point of seeing what device has which IP address. I have intermittent problems communicating via web interface with devices on the 192 range, I think this is a resolution problem (partly because the subnet is wrong) I don't have problems with devices that are on the LEA assigned 172.19.xx.xxx range. People can print and from that point of view its all good, Its just not being able to manage it VIA web browser (Almost like its timing out because the switch can't work out the route to the device) and that i have no central point of seeing what device has what IP (Because there are no reservations in DHCP) Thanks to all that are posting, I hope that makes a bit more sense. I am trying my best to articulate this one but its hard. Barry

Erm, Not sure i have fully explained myself. I have included a diagram to try and help explain. The traffic is just TCP/IP traffic, The switches are working out the route to take to the device. I can only call up the interfaces for these devices via the server with the second IP address setup on the NIC as i hope the diagram shows. The users can print because they print to the spool on the server which can communicate with the print device. Does this help explain? Barry

At the moment i use Netop (Or Tutor as its branded by a certain company we all know and love ) Its very good but i have just been googling other packages mentioned like Net Support and looked at the screenshot to find that UI looks strangly familiar, Why you ask? Because that UI looks a lot like RM Tutor 3 To be released at the end of april See screenie, Have RM rebranded another product and passed it on as there own? I like netop, At least i know it works, I don't think we will be upgrading to 3 as 2 does what we want but still thought i would raise the point. Barry

Hey Everyone, Just thought I would try and get some input on a problem i have at the moment: (Most) of our printers and older switches (Ones that I didn't install) are currently on an IP range of 192.168.x.xxx ranging from 100 to 300 and a subnet of 255.255.252.0 Now I don't think this is correct. Firstly that subnet is not valid for that IP address range and I have also noticed some very strange things starting to happen now that I have turned STP (Kids know that broadcast storms break networks without it turned on now). Firstly our STP new managed switches are on our 'normal' IP range of 172.xx.xx.xxx and a subnet of 255.255.252.0. I have set allocations for these in DHCP and from there I can see what devices has what IP. I have also noticed that the devices are quicker than he ones on the private subnet both in terms of say printing or loading up web interfaces in IE for management. I have run ethereal to see what the switches are doing in the way STP path resolution and there seems to be a couple of seconds if not more in terms of latency in resolution of private devices. Sometimes i also see complete failure in communication with the device VIA web interface. To my way of seeing it we don't actually have anywhere to see what device has what IP address. I have tried to explain that putting them on the same IP Address range and subnet will boost performance of these devices but I don't seem to be getting anywhere except 'It was installed by RM that way' Anyone got any thoughts/How you do it (All comments appreciated, Even if you are CC3 OR Vanilla) on this as I don't want to keep pushing it if I am not accurate, After all the people I am challenging on this could be right, And knowing my luck me be wrong. Barry

Hi everyone, Just a heads up, Don't know if any of you are SIMS.NET users but all our admin staff say its slow and i just picked up on this over at icttechnician.com Someone at Capita posted this reply I hope our LEA pick up on this ASAP because its a pain in the arse to keep hearing 'Sims is slow' day in, day out. Continued updates at the following web: Barry

Thanks for the heads up here, Onlt have about 20 at the moment but its bound to grow. Managed Switchs, Wireless AP's, Printers, Etc Barry

Don't know if you have seen this but just saw on the BBC RSS feed The supermarket Tesco has asked auction website eBay to stop people selling its Computers for Schools vouchers - but eBay says the sales are quite legal. The vouchers are issued to customers at a rate of one for each £10 of shopping. Schools can redeem them for a wide range of equipment, though the value is so low it is not clear why people would pay money for them in an auction. Some sellers on eBay claim to have many hundreds of vouchers they do not need as a result of their purchases. "The sale of these coupons is permitted under UK law," eBay said - so they could be sold on its website. Thought, Well, Thats one way of doing, At least you wouldn't have to count the bloody things as you would now how many you have bid for. What the news doesn't tell you is that you need 32,000 of these things to get a PC. Why? Because RM machines are so expensive. 4 Years worth of vouchers at a big school (1200 Pupils) and what do you get?.... A celeron Barry

AHHHHH I am fed up with this type of Wanaa-Bee Techie Teacher. In the wise words of a Pizza Hut advert: ‘We will do the technical stuff, You do the gawping’ No. We think if we say outright no, we are being unhelpful and not doing our job, Or at least thats what our network managers and SMT say when they have a complaint whereby an ICT techie has said no straight away to a request from a member of staff before. Theres no winning. Reading back there have been many classic comments made and im sure more will follow Regards, Barry Leonard