dcwhitworth

He looks like he's stumped

I suspect the issue is largely that the SMB usage on Konica copiers is not part of their core functionality, it's probably an area few engineers are familiar with so finding someone who knows about the issue is hard. They could certainly do a better job of circulating information though. They should publish a list of copiers, their compatibility with SMB2+ or otherwise and upgrade plans. I *know* such a spreadsheet exists internally because someone I spoke to on the phone told me he was looking things up on it.

That's acute observation

@LazyD If you're interested I've got an old copy of an internal RM document on the P2V process, it's for migration to VMWare but it may have some useful points.

As a side note to the technical aspect, I would take this up with SLT. Make them aware that there are staff who are not taking Data Protection seriously and that this probably involves Safeguarding issues also. Get them to approve an appropriate password regime and then implement it.

Geneva need to ask ?

To be fair I think 'should work' was my phrasing not theirs. Sorry but they didn't send me a list, I think it was an internal list that the guy was consulting. I think he said the C range of copiers will or soon will be ok, but don't take my word for it, as them directly.

FWIW I had a conversation with someone at Konica today which was a callback after I logged the issue via [email protected]. He has a list of copiers and status and planned firmware updates. For our copiers the status is - C308 - should work on latest firmware C654e - new firmware needed, in development, hope to release by end July / early August BZ552 - new firmware needed, in development, hope to release by end July / early August BZ950 - Needs SMB1, no listed plans to update Hope that's helpful to people

Sadly this is a staff folder with myriad, bewildering and poorly documented permissions set (project ongoing to get rid / overhaul it). In the end I did the following - Restore VMDK file from last known good(ish) NTFS date Remove faulty disk from VM guest Attach restored one to it Run CHKDSK to fix underlying problems Do a file restore fro the latest backup using the 'Copy to' option, leaving the 'restore NTFS permission and shares' unticked. Took about a day all told but seems to have worked.

I suppose you could take that tack. Personally I'm worried about the race being rigged

I'd stick my oar in but it will probably only start a row

Can anyone suggest some ideas for this issue we've got ? I've got a few thoughts but would like to try a wider audience before I move forwards We are running Windows Server 2012 R2 on VMWare 6.0 and backing up using Veeam 9.0 We have a volume where NTFS permissions have become subtly corrupt which is affecting the access of some but by no means all users. Unfortunately since this corruption a significant amount of work has been done on the volume. We now have the situation where we have backups with corrupt NTFS but up to date data and backups with correct NTFS but out of date data. Can anyone suggest a recovery scenario that will leave us with a volume with correct NTFS and up to date data ? The file-level restore options seem very limited with Veeam.

Given that MS are saying Windows 10 will be the last version of Windows, what is the point of an OVS agreement anymore ? Just buy a load of Windows 10 licences in bulk and you're done as far as Windows goes, yes you still need to buy Office but that is likely to end up as a much cheaper cost than an annual OVS licence. Can someone point out what I'm missing here ?

I'm not sure he was fishing for compliments.

The ducting is quote challenging (and of course undocumented) and it took them almost half a day to find a route. We have only just started using the company but so far I'm impressed with them, as long as it's not a complete rip off I'm reasonably happy. With something as important as an inter-building link I'd be happier putting the whole job in the hands of professionals.

To be honest that seems about right then. It's an external run and there are significant and non too easy runs from the end of the ducting to the comms cabinets.

I've just had a quote of £3250 from a local company for two days work to install a fibre cable with four pairs between two buildings through some existing (but challenging) ducting. This includes all installation, termination, containment, new patch panels and fly cables. I've never directly commissioned a fibre installation before so I just wanted to know if anyone could tell me if this was a reasonable quote. Thanks

Clearly someone has misunderstood the idea of getting a personal trainer to help them pass.

That's just cheesy

Shame on you, mocking that which is holy.

Glad to see it didn't cause much of a flap. Trivia point - that has to be about the only ground in league football I can recognise without hints, Peterhead in Scotland. The ground is so small that if a shot goes over the crossbar someone has to fetch the ball from outside the ground.

That's what I heard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xLUEMj6cwA

Don't worry, it was just a shot in the dark.

I would have thought that was automatic

I think they wanted him to target a certain audience but he recoiled at the idea. At least that was in a magazine.