Garacesh

Truth be told, I'm mostly just poking fun. I don't have nor want an iPhone (mostly because of their vast catalogue of anti-consumer practices) so it doesn't actually affect me at all. But also I don't see a single sensible reason for half-baking features like Apple does. Standards are there for a reason, why would you not put them in to their full capability? Like imagine buying a sports car with a 70 litre tank and then finding out "oh yeah but we put a hole in it so if you fill it past 50 litres it just dumps the excess". Sure it'll work 'good enough', but you've just paid an arm and a leg for what's supposed to be a top-of-the-line device and you're okay with finding out it's been purposely gimped? FWIW I do hope everyone with an iPhone, old or new, is enjoying their use.

Okay then, clarification, up-to-date standards, not a 23-year-old spec (Google says USB2 was April 2000) Typical Apple, really. Taking what works and doing it their way, which half the time is a much worse implementation. Fast/wireless charging spring to mind.

I have a Samsung Galaxy S22+ and I wouldn't be seen dead with an iPhone. I like my USB-C actually conforming to standards

But you can fix it, right? I really need it for period 1 geography in 20 minutes..

Beat me to it. I was not aware there were gummy bears going around. My disappoint is immeasurable and my day is ruined.

Yes but what I mean is you wouldn't want to use a group to disseminate information to parents. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I've understood the idea as "whack all the parents in a group chat, and then send it to the group chat", akin to how you'd use a mailing list. If the parents are all in a group chat, they will be able to see the phone numbers of all the other parents.

We use Intune for our phones. You can either go full lockdown where you can only have apps that're mandated (or at least marked available), or you can go reasonably hands-off and just have them company-owned but they could use it as if it were their own personal phone re: apple account, apps, etc. What is it you're trying to achieve?

You definitely wouldn't want to use groups! You can see the phone number of all other group members.

There's a lot of small devices that you just charge up and slap a sim card in, typically they last around a week? I had one that I stashed in the frame of my ebike back when I cycled to work. You do need to find a way to wire them in, or keep remembering to charge them up, though. Edit: A quick gander on Amazon shows some you wire into the battery. For someone doing something a little more organised, that'd likely be ripped out sharpish, but just to find where it's been abandoned if someone's taken it for a joyride, might do the trick?

No they wouldn't, because Apple will still do their stupid "oh look, shame the green bubble" lark. Also as the USB-C debacle has shown, Apple only pretend to integrate standards AAAANYWAY back on topic I feel like e-mail is probably still the best option, because it's better logged and searchable, and it can be passed around from person to person or have multiple people all using it simultaneously (e.g. MS365 dedicated mailbox). Far easier to keep a record of communication if a parent ends up getting nasty. I mean I'd expect some of these are features of the business accounts but I don't know for certain. Plus, and this is just personal opinion, I feel like email brings with it an assumption of non-instantaneous communication. Instant messaging just 'feels' more like someone should be manning the number at all times.

Most schools don't have nearly that strict uniform inspections. In my experience they're too busy tackling excess jewellery, hair colours/styles, too much makeup, the wrong kind of footwear (typically because kids are trying to get away with wearing black trainers.. Nike TN's(? I think?) were the 'in' footwear last I encountered that), shirts not being tucked in, or skirts being too short. Not saying I agree or disagree with any of those rules, just that those have typically been the ones management have targeted. Shoes being polished aren't even an afterthought. It's all well and good taking pride in your appearance, but that just gives bullies another thing to target. Take it from someone who was always bullied severely just for the audacity of growing my hair long as a male - far better to keep your head down and not stick out.

Intrinsically? Nothing. In context? Nobody else will be doing it. It's different. Different is bad. Different gets you bullied. It's awful, but that's the world we live in.

It works.... ish, here. Which is the same as my last school. All of the urls they request fully whitelisted. FWIW I'm glad it works so well for you - I'd rather it be good for someone, at least

Potentially out-of-date information, but about two years ago I slapped Senso and NetSupport DNA onto the same computers and started typing away on word, terms to do with drugs, violence, sexual language, "I want to kill myself", etc. As much as NetSupport's support are the top of their game, Senso fared far better in a live environment for keyword monitoring. Impero were heavily pushing class:room at the time, and I can't remember why but we deemed that unsuitable. Maybe it's worth just doing a live trial, both on the same suite for a week, see what picks up what? NetSupport are pretty good about giving out trials, can't speak for Senso though. That being said, Senso's remote control was, and still is, utter garbage. So if you want to roll out the teacher portion of the software for locking pcs/launching software/limiting internet/etc, I'd recommend NetSupport

Thermal events/thermal runaway isn't good at the best of times, let alone when you consider the amount of energy your UPS' can hold. I'm not convinced I'd want to move it, but I'm not convinced I'd want to leave it put, either!

Genuinely saved one comms room of mine about 6 years ago when I remembered a thread about UPS batteries giving off an eggy/sulphury smell before they go pop-pop-kaboom. Welcome newbies!

Slight correction, the cisco style switches all have spanning-tree priority 6, for some reason Office has lost half of my documentation It's lost the dead end VLAN I set up too, no idea why. Uuurrrgh gonna have to update them all over again. Grumble. The network is basically a star, but we're currently in the process of stacking 2 separate switches into one logical switch over the network. We have a 25GB fibre link between them as they're in different buildings, but I'm fairly certain they're still operating independently. Amusingly, the main core is affected by this issue, but the other half is the one with 197 days on it.

I would have expected so, at least that was my assumption, this is all a bit of a learning experience! I'm going through our infrastructure tidying up and documenting for handover. I've done plenty of vlans, rate limiting, snmp, dns, etc in the past but this is a bit of a deeper dive than I'm used to.

See I was thinking maybe something like that but there's just no pattern to which switches do or don't change themselves. My initial thought was that a rogue device could be the issue and I'd be able to find roughly where the device was by looking at the cost/weight, but it truly is a random assortment of switches (even including the current core itself) We did discuss this BPDU with our 3rd party support a while ago. For the procurve-style switches we've currently got bpdu-protection and admin-edge-port set on ports connected to access points, but that's it. Their recommendation was to enable it on access points, the line out to the internet connection, and any point-to-point links (except all of our point-to-point links are between switches, so turning that on kills the link) Haven't gone through the cisco-style ones yet, but looking at their configs, they all just have spanning-tree with nothing else, except one switch that has an additional spanning-tree priority 6.

Something very bizarre is happening with spanning tree for about half of our switches with Spanning Tree and I'm struggling to pin it down. Periodically, typically 2 or 3 times per hour, spanning tree topology changes on about half of our switches. The other half of our switches have more sensible timespans, 22 days, 56 days, 197 day, I've been through looking at all of our switches. As it currently stands: All of the switches have the core switch as their CST/Root source. All of the switches have themselves set as the IST/Bridge. Every switch that can is running MSTP. One is running RSTP because it's a cheaper switch that doesn't have that option. All of the Cisco-style (tagged/untagged) switches have CST priority 16384 All of the Cisco-style switches have IST priority 32768 All of the Procurve-style (access/trunk) switches have CST priority 16384 (except the one that can't run MSTP) Most of the Procurve-style switches have IST priority 24576 The only exceptions here are the old cores that have IST priority 32768 And the current core (the one that's the CST/Root for all the others), which has IST priority 16384 [*]Topology changes occur on all of the the affected switches simultaneously. Last topology change occurred changes more-or-less in tandem. Additionally, if I log on to any of the affected switches and look at the logs for when the topology changes, there is... nothing. Absolutely nothing. No events correlating with the time the topology changed. Weirdly, not ever switch in a chain does it. We have one boarding house where the 1st switch over there will do it, but neither of the 2 switches down the link from that one do it. I'm massively at a loss now. Where the heck do I go from here? I've not got a clue.

Why listen to radio when Spotify exists? In general I agree with @elsiegee40 though. People like what they like and don't like what they don't like, there's no real forcing it, and (generally speaking) the more you try and press an issue the more the other person becomes resistant to the idea.

I did enjoy Silo, but there were a fair few.. Maybe not plot 'holes', but things that just really didn't make much sense when you give them much critical thought. In hindsight, knowing the ending, it seemed like the major plot-point was overly-complex just for overly-complex sake. That being said, I didn't guess the ending (and I'm usually pretty good at that!) and it did keep me very entertained, so I'd still recommend it. Won't say anything further though because it would be a massive spoiler. (Also obligatory 'I haven't read the books though' so it could be they changed a tonne of stuff and it all made much more sense on paper)

Yep, I've already documented the Cisco-style switches we've got, trying to do the same for the older ones. No, I don't expect they are. To clarify, the 3 settings I've asked about, I've asked about because there is no consistency about how they're set on each switch, not because they're related somehow. The switches aren't actually procurve switches, they're mostly various flavours of the HP 2530 series switches. I just thought the two command structures were referred to as procurve-style (tagged/untagged) and cisco-style (access/trunk)

'ello everybody. We've had a review from our support folks regarding our switch configurations, mostly aimed at bringing our old procurve-style devices in line with our newer cisco-style ones, but I'm in the mud a little regarding some of the advice. Sometimes it's a little inconsistent or not really quantified very well, and whilst I could go back and ask them about it (which I plan to do) I'd rather get my head around it a little more so I know I'm phrasing my questions properly (and also I like to understand the changes I'm making, as that makes me more likely to remember them.. Plus, y'know, who doesn't like actually knowing what they're doing..?) LLDP - What devices should or shouldn't have it on their ports? We've been advised to change lldp admin-status from disable to rxonly, but I notice that there's no real rhyme or reason for which ports are or aren't specified. On some switches, it's everything but the uplinks, on some it's almost everything but the uplinks but not quite, on others there's no real structure as to which ports are or aren't. Does the old setting of disabled mean that it's off on those ports, rxonly sets it as receive only, and then any unspecified ports are defaulted to send-receive? STP (bpdu-protection and admin-edge-port) - Where should it or should it not be applied? Most of our switches have spanning tree ## admin-edge-port and spanning tree ## bpdu-protection enabled, but as with LLDP there's no real criteria obvious for it. Some switches have it not at all, with just spanning-tree and nothing further, some switches have it only set on the ports connected to access points, some have it set on everything except uplinks, and some on a random assortment of ports. Also some switches also have an additional loop-protect setting applied. What's the difference? I thought spanning tree was loop protection (plus other stuff)? Rate limits Practically every port has rate-limit icmp ip-all percent 1 set on every port, which we have been advised to remove from printer ports. However, as with lldp and stp, there's a bunch of other devices with settings. The settings are usually consistent (rate-limit bcast in percent 10, rate-limit mcast in percent 10, and occasionally rate-limit unknown-unicast in percent 10 (or occasionally 20), but again there's no real pattern here. Some workstations do, some don't, some AP's do, some don't. Some switches have no rate limits applied on any ports. I know a lot this will likely just be holdovers from the way a switch/port used to be configured, where bits of it have been changed but other bits have been left alone, but I'll hold my hand up and admit it's not something I'm intimately familiar with.

There was not, I'm afraid. We're going to test using the full decryption but we haven't moved to it yet and I don't expect that's going to make much of a difference, unless NetSweeper's 'don't decrypt' list (that I can't even see! It's ridiculous how much of our netsweeper we don't even know exists, I only saw it because one of the reps screen-shared) is ridiculously extensive.