Re: Hub on Servers
- From: "Larry Struckmeyer" <lstruckmeyer(at)mis-wizards(dot)com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 14:57:54 -0400
Hi:
Going to assume you have SBS, since you posted in the SBS group. However,
the situation you describe could be any OS.
Sounds as though you have a good handle on the situation. Your new "sys
admin" may be in over his head.
I would think along two lines.
One is to bring in a local person in to evaluate the situation and "assist"
your admin, which might be enough to either get it straightened out or cause
him to resign. And they could report to you on his apparent level of
expertise.
The other is to just replace him if your company is experiencing loss of
productivity because of the IT situation you describe.
The need for an in house IT person is vastly overrated. I take care of over
25 servers and over 300 workstations across more than 15 customers. Perhaps
you could bring in a local firm to deal with your IT challenges for a flat
rate. You might be surprised how much an in house person actually costs
when you consider the salary, benefits, desk space, and in this case
aggravation.. Not to mention the challenge you have of finding and keeping
the right one.
BTW, this is an older news group for now out of date versions of SBS. You
might get more response if you copied this post to:
microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs
which is the current SBS newsgroup.
Larry
"Parvardigar" <parvardigar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1192299609.636960.289660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I just posted recently. And I need to post again. I'm feel very
disturbed - and hopefully my distraction is all do to with an over
reaction.
Being the owner of this Wan company I've had to take notice our Sys
Admin's activities and the new server room.
Our former Sys admin left due to illness. We hired another to take of
SysAdm responsibilities. It began promising. Four months later I'm
beginning to feel uneasy.
We had all our servers in this one small room. It is always hot in
there. He insisted that best to keep everything cool. A plausible
argument. So we relocated the servers into a very cold room. However
we kept all the routers, switches, adtrans and so forth in the
original room. That's were we have the patch wires centrally located.
I'm struggling to work with the new SysAdmin. However, things are
beginning to distract me. Since he's been with the company we've lost
FQDN over the Wan. He simple shrugs 'is DNS'. And I've strongly
invited this fellow to fix the situation. The work around is mapping,
using ip addresses, from one location to another. And if I ask on the
situation he gives these long discourses. Active directory, DNS server
and all. Thus the computers across the Wan are no longer graphically
presented in My Computer, Remote Desktop.
I'm working hard running this company. Returning to computer
topologies is unexpected. And the singular most urgent reason to post
this concern is the new server room. I went in there this weekend to
spend quiet time. To really inspect the situation.
I had to track the Ethernet cables to see exactly where they ran to.
The space is 30 ft by 30 ft. On one wall is the only Ethernet port.
This singular Cat 5 runs across the room to a 5 port Dlink hub sitting
on the floor (sort of slightly off the floor because of the stretch).
Term Server. Thus the only cat5 in this room (from the wall plate)From this 5 port hub one cat 5 runs to the PDC. Another cat 5 to the
this cat5 runs over thirty feet to a hub. The cat 5 runs, from the
hub, five feet to the Servers. Now here's the grip: two additional
cables run off the hub -and return back across the room (30feet) to
two computers near his desk. Those additional pc's may be for future
use.
I know, and I've asked 'why do we have all the equipment -2 Proliants,
powersupply, two 22inch rack -scattered across this vast space? Why
didn't you originally set it up (as we requested) at the wall where we
have our Ethernet wall plate?
That' why I am in this new server room to inspect. The users are
complaining of sluggishness. We used to have the servers connected to
the Baystack in the other room; and now, they are running off this
hub. And the additional Baystack sits on the rack -unused.
This finishes up the Ethernet situation. We do have a T1 Line
installed. That was over a month ago! We keep waiting, and wonder,
for this T1 line to be operational on our network. Next to the PDC and
Term sit two rack mounts. On the rack mounts are Cisco switches. And
I'm perplexed, and feel frustrated. Am I off in this stated
presentation -my concerns - or is this overreacting. This bottom line
is I want to trust this SysAdmin -and with what I know I'm beginning
to have doubts.
And anything technical - he has an immediate, very thorough
explanation.
I need to post this. To collect insight. . I'm willing to do homework
to correct this mess. I'll want to insist that all the equipment be
located in one area (racks, servers, switches) where that Ethernet
port is locatedIt seems that from the wall plate the Cat 5 should be
running into the 24port Baystack Switch. This hub sitting on the
floor with all the wires flowing in, out of it, it is bazaar. We have
to step over the mix of wire to cross the room.
Sorry for a long note. I hope there is help on this one! Thanks
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Hub on Servers
- From: Parvardigar
- Re: Hub on Servers
- References:
- Hub on Servers
- From: Parvardigar
- Hub on Servers
- Prev by Date: Hub on Servers
- Next by Date: Re: Hub on Servers
- Previous by thread: Hub on Servers
- Next by thread: Re: Hub on Servers
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
