RE: Hiding a Linux computer
=> ...Or it works like the helpdesk I work on: Someone grabs an IP address,
=> DHCP gives out that address, user gets an IP conflict. User calls us, we
=> call net eng, who bounces the static address and leases it to the DHCP
user.
=> Static user calls us, we ask them why they're screwing up the network.
They
=> complain, we offer to remove the computer from their desk and give it to
=> someone who has a little less free time on their hands :-)...
=
=Well...
=I work at a hospital... ther eis no telling what the person using the IP
=was doing (plus...its always possible they don't even know what an IP is
=and it may not even be their fault).
=
=Someone migh thave to answer for something if Net Eng compromised
=patient care just to smite a user and teach someone a lesson.
...And there's the difference - there's no lives on the line in this area.
=besides... half the machines are Macs using "dynamic" adressing in
=MacTCP (which is NOT dhcp)...so they get an error...then it steals a new
=IP...90% of the time they wont even call the Help Desk
Only nice thing here - we dropped all support for everything but Win95 or
WinNT network clients (dropping the DOS, Win31, Mac, etc. really cuts down
on the calls!)
=> (Being on the Win95/MSOffice support team can really give you a crappy
=> outlook on life...)
=
=esp when Outlook sucks as much as it does! (I had a user specifically
=ask me to have their new Outlook acount removed and to put them back
=on Helix (unix) e-mail)
We've forced people to use the Exchange client. Had to force a few people to
dump Outlook - in one case it was a person who liked to use the cool Outlook
style sheets, which screws with EVERYONE else. Fixed that by formatting his
hard drive and installing a set of "standard" apps in it's place, then
telling him that we wouldn't take his calls if he put that stuff back on...
Cold, but he likes to load lots of beta apps then complain to us that we're
having network problems...
=In any case..thats why I (the only Macintosh Tech Supporter in our
=team) am hopeing to get out of this line of work and into one where I
=can use Unix systems all day long.
I'm shooting for something like that also - the company here will actually
reimburse me for any training materials, and considered Debian, 2 books,
etc. to be a viable training item for learning Unix. (Especially when they
realized what a copy of Solaris or whatever costs... This was
pre-free-Solaris days.) So, I load and reload Debian, fiddle with init
files, study the books and CBT's, and hope :-).
=> (Another person in a shop that keeps saying, "We can't use Linux -
there's
=> no company to hold responsible if there's problems".)
=
=Bah...Chances are its your own fault anyway...
=besides...just blame it all on "Network VooDoo"
=and those Gremlins in the closet!
Actually it's from a couple managers who are pro-M$ and are actually fairly
technically competent (a dangerous mix!). A couple of us are already
preparing our own little "NT server" for training ourselves (can you say
Samba <g>..).
=-Steve
=who is amazed that anyone thinks the ability to get support for an OS is
=more important than having the OS actually work
...And we've discussed THAT one here, also. That, and the corollary:
Tom
(who is amazed that anyone thinks the quality of an OS is tied to it's
price...)
Reply to: