toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13514 discussions

CIFS Security auditing
by Drew O'Donnell 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

We want to be able to monitor security changes on our filers for CIFS users. I have enabled CIFS auditing on our filer, and it is working, but I am having some additional issues. The EVT format of the event log presents us with a problem because it is a binary file. We currently scan the NT event logs with a service that runs on each of our servers. Any unauthorized access strings are picked up and forwarded to our paging\mail system. Since we cannot run this service on a Netapp, we are unable to scan these files. I have seen some Perl Scripts that can convert the EVT log to a text file, which we can scan, but I would rather not do this. How are admins monitoring CIFS security changes on your Filers? Drew

1 0

Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

In a message dated 10/3/01 7:55:37 PM Central Daylight Time, jwitham(a)takedapharm.com writes: > I really wish the old chrome faceplates would make a comeback. I'd kill to > have one hanging on my wall... Hello, John: We have a beautiful chrome faceplate set from an F540 that would be PERFECT for your basement wall. All Toasters' readers are hereby invited to bid on this classic collectors' item! Bidding will end tomorrow, Friday, at 5pm Pacific time. The winning bidder will send his/her check to the "September 11th Fund", United Way of New York City, 2 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016; the faceplates will be shipped free of charge. The winning bidder will be publicly recognized for his/her generosity and/or foolishness. Good luck! Regards, Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 scott(a)unioncomputer.com

2 1

Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by Waters, G Scott DSTI 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Extra $100??? Correct me if I am wrong ... I think it is a lot more than $100. - Scott W -----Original Message----- From: Pete Ehlke <pde(a)foad.org> To: toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Thu Oct 04 11:56:32 2001 Subject: Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore! * Dave Hitz <hitz(a)netapp.com> said, on [011003 21:40]: > > The F840 has been shipping for ages now, and nobody has complained > loudly about the color. > I think I can speak for everyone here when I say: Bring back the chrome faceplates! The 630 was just... well.. it was just badass. I don't think there's *anyone* who wouldn't pay the extra $100 for a chrome faceplate. -Pete

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Honeycutt, Michael 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Yea, but you are still at the mecry of an os like NT/2K, solaris in a SAN enviroment. That was one of the main reason my company went with NAS. We have had our filer 4 10 months, and have had about 4 minutes of outage. Not too shabby compared to NT huh? Also, it is true that MS does not support Exchange on a filer, however some companies do (IE - IBM). Not sure about SQL. -----Original Message----- From: Thomas.L.White(a)chase.com [mailto:Thomas.L.White@chase.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 11:29 AM To: Hall, John L Cc: 'Clark Turner'; toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I guess its a good thing those SANs are so cheap. "Hall, John L" <HallJL(a)MapleLeaf.ca>@mathworks.com on 10/04/2001 10:54:38 AM Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com To: "'Clark Turner'" <cturner(a)phx1.bcbsaz.com>, toasters(a)mathworks.com, PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com cc: Subject: RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost. -----Original Message----- From: Clark Turner [mailto:cturner@phx1.bcbsaz.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 10:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Thomas.L.White＠chase.com 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

I guess its a good thing those SANs are so cheap. "Hall, John L" <HallJL(a)MapleLeaf.ca>@mathworks.com on 10/04/2001 10:54:38 AM Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com To: "'Clark Turner'" <cturner(a)phx1.bcbsaz.com>, toasters(a)mathworks.com, PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com cc: Subject: RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost. -----Original Message----- From: Clark Turner [mailto:cturner@phx1.bcbsaz.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 10:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Bunce, Ken 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

This is very interesting considering that my NetApp representatives in conjunction with their SQL experts maintain that SQL and Exchange is supported on NetApp NAS appliances. They brought to point earlier mentioned MS knowledge Base documents. Even the NetApp's SQL engineering interface, her name eludes me now, in Redmond, stated the support exists. My corporation just purchased a F840 based on this information. Let's hear from NetApp! Ken Bunce Manager of Networking & Computer Technology Juno Lighting, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Hall, John L To: 'Clark Turner'; toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Sent: 10/4/01 9:54 AM Subject: RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost. -----Original Message----- From: Clark Turner [mailto:cturner@phx1.bcbsaz.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 10:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Hall, John L 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost. -----Original Message----- From: Clark Turner [mailto:cturner@phx1.bcbsaz.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 10:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Clark Turner 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by Thomas.L.White＠chase.com 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

I have not seen one in the flesh is there a goo photo representation on the web somewhere ?? thanks tw Dave Hitz <hitz(a)netapp.com>@mathworks.com on 10/04/2001 12:05:29 AM Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com To: jwitham(a)takedapharm.com cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore! On Oct 03, jwitham(a)takedapharm.com wrote: > Hate the faceplate. It's that damn Burnt Cyan color Crayola that always > survived my grade school years unscathed. It's also "bubbly". It looks > _so_ out of place next to my 760s. Newsflash!: We are going to change that exciting "Burt Orange" color to the same "champagne" color as the F840. The F840 has been shipping for ages now, and nobody has complained loudly about the color. Of course, we have had a few people who said, "I wish it was something more 'flashy'." Now I personally love bright, highly-saturated colors, and I love the F840 face plate. But the problem is that, whatever direction of 'flashy' color you try to go, someone will have a bad association with it. Like for you, it sounds like you had a traumatic experience with a grade school teacher and a crayola. I am so sorry to have triggered this awful flashback for you. Hopefully the "champagne" will have more positive associations for people. :-) Dave

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Joe Luchtenberg 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Article alludes to possible SQL based file system implementation for Exchange. It quotes MS Knowledge Base Article Q115043 ( http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q115/0/43.asp <http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q115/0/43.asp> ), which states that NAS is not supported for SQL Server. However, that KB Article is marked as being last reviewed on March 4, 2000. A more recent article (Q304261; http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q304/2/61.ASP <http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q304/2/61.ASP> ; reviewed August 24, 2001) states that Microsoft provides limited support for non-clustered SQL Server on Network Appliance F700 and F800 filers. While not explicitly clear, this does appear to leave the door open for support of future Exchange architectures with SQL-based file systems on NetApp filers. This article inplies no changes to the current (uneasy) status quo between Microsoft and NetApp with regards to Exchange. Joe Joe Luchtenberg Dataline, Inc. 757-858-0600 757-285-1223 (mobile) 757-858-0606 (fax) joe.luchtenberg(a)data-line.com www.data-line.com -----Original Message----- From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:PMAGLINGER@scvl.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 9:06 AM To: 'NetApps list server' Subject: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters