Writing ... or Just Practicing?

Random Disconnected Diatribes of a p&p Documentation Engineer

  • Writing ... or Just Practicing?

    Over-egging the Curator's View

    • 2 Comments

    At one time you had to work in a museum to be a curator, but the wonders of information technology mean that now we can all exhibit our technical grasp of complicated topics and elucidate the general population by identifying the optimum resources that help to answer even the most complex of questions.

    I'm talking about the new Curah! website here. The idea is simple: a resource that gathers together the questions most commonly asked about computing topics; each with a carefully and lovingly crafted set of links to the most useful blogs, reference documents, tools, and other information that offers a solution to the question.

    Anyone can register and create a curation, and the site is optimized for search engines to make it easy to find answers. It's still in beta as I write this, but already has hundreds of answers to common questions. The great thing is that the curations are not just a set of links like you'd get from the usual search engines, which tend to optimize the list based on keywords in the resources, the number of links to them from other pages, and the newness of the content. None of these factors can provide the same level of usefulness as a list compiled by an expert in the relevant topic area who regularly creates and uses information that provides the maximum benefits.

    My interest in the Curah! site also comes about partly because I am part of the group that defined the original vision and got it started. I've also added a few curations of my own, which are centered on the topic area that I now seem to have been permanently assigned to - Windows Azure application design and deployment. My regular reader will probably have noticed this from the rambling posts on this blog in the past.

    However, one point that concerned me was that, having created my own curations, I am now responsible for maintaining them. As I plan to create more in the future, I was beginning to wonder if I would end up spending all of every Monday just checking and updating them as the target resources move, disappear, or I discover new ones. What I needed was some type of automated tool that would make this job easier. So I built one.

    The CurahCheck utility is a simple console-based utility that will check one or more views on the Curah! site by testing all of the links in each curation ID you specify. The curation title and the linked page titles can be displayed to ensure that it is valid and that all of the linked resources are still available. It can also be run interactively, or automatically from a scheduled task.

    The utility generates a log file containing details of the checks and any errors found. It can also generate an HTML page for your website that shows the results of the most recent check and the contents of the log file. If you have access to an email server, the utility can send warning email messages when an error is detected in any of the views it scans.

    If you are a Curah curationist you can download the utility from here, and use and modify it as you wish. The source project and code for Visual Studio 2012 is included. Before you use it, you'll need to edit the settings in the configuration file to suit your requirements - the file contains full details of the settings required and their effect on program behavior.

    Of course, the usual terms and conditions about me not being responsible for any side-effects of using the program, such as your house falling down, your children being eaten by a dinosaur, or your computer bursting into flames, still apply...

  • Writing ... or Just Practicing?

    Mister (Sometimes) Fixit

    • 2 Comments

    No I'm not talking about the clever "please mend my computer" tools that you can run on Microsoft's website. I'm talking about my regular tasks trying to fix all the things that break in our house, seemingly one per day at the moment. It's usually a wide and assorted selection of tasks; this week comprising a table lamp, a DECT phone, my fishpond filter, SQL Database, and Windows 8.

    Invariably my fixit jobs fall into two categories: "not worth the effort" and "fingers stuck together with superglue again." The second category tends to be associated with jewellery and ornament repairs (the latter typically being my fault), but the table lamp repair was in the first category - an IKEA lamp that originally cost twelve pounds new, but came from a jumble sale at a cost of two pounds. My wife had bought six new 12V halogen bulbs for it that cost more than the lamp did originally, but it refused to work. The transformer is a sealed unit, and the wiring is sealed inside the lamp. Do I spend three hours breaking it just to see what's wrong?

    But I had better luck with the DECT phone, a couple of new triple-A rechargeable batteries brought it back to life. And I managed to fix my fishpond filter using the typical handyman technique of a few bits of bent wire. These are the satisfying kind of repair jobs where you can carry around a big toolbox, and look like you know what you're doing. It works even better if you can arrange it so you didn't shave for a couple of days before.

    What's most annoying however, and has little capacity for appearing butch and manly, is the so-far-unmentioned third category of repair jobs: broken software. A year or so ago I parcelled up my locally-hosted websites and dispatched them to heaven - or, to be more precise, to live in the clouds of Windows Azure. Amongst them is our local village website, which is reasonably complex because it handles news, events, photos, and has a user registration facility.

    Yes, I know I should have adapted it to use claims-based authentication and Windows Azure Active Directory, but I just never got round to it; instead it has an ageing "aspnetdb" database sitting in SQL Database. There's only one role instance, and it works fine. Well, almost. Yes I did do comprehensive testing after deployment before the site went live, checking that I could add and edit all the items on the site, sign in and change my password, view lists of registered users, and see the error lists in the admin section of the site.

    I even made sure the site could create and remove users, and allow them to edit their details. But it turns out that my test coverage was a little less than perfect. For the first time since deployment I needed to use the functions of RoleManager to change the roles for a registered user. And everything broke. Even going into the SQL Database management portal and deleting the row in the data view of the table failed. As did executing a SQL DELETE statement in the query window.

    It took some searching based on the error message about SQL collation to find the answer. And the fix is so simple that it should painted in six inch high letters on a big piece of wood and nailed to the Azure portal. Simply open the stored procedure named aspnet_UsersInRoles_AddUsersToRoles and insert the text COLLATE Latin1_General_CI_AS into the DECLARE @tbNames... line as shown here, and then do the same with the aspnet_UsersInRoles_RemoveUsersFromRoles stored procedure.

    To get to the stored procedures, open the database management page from the main Windows Azure portal and choose the Manage icon at the bottom of the page. Sign into the SQL Database server and choose Design in the left-hand navigation bar, then choose Stored Procedures in the tabs near the top of the page. Choose the Edit icon next to the stored procedure in the list and do the edit. Then choose the Save icon on the toolbar. Repeat with the other stored procedure.

    Meanwhile, ever since I upgraded my trusty Dell E4300 to Windows 8 I've been plagued by wandering cursor disease. I'll be typing away quite happily and suddenly the letters appears in the middle of the next paragraph, or halfway along the next line. It's amazing how much something likeum. this can screw up your finely crafted and perfectly formatted text. It really is a pain in the b

    Of course, the answer is the same as most Windows 8 problems with older hardware. The jazzy new all-singing and all-dancing hardware drivers that come with Windows 8 don't always do the same as the wheezing and arthritic ones that came on a disk with the computer when you bought it. Thankfully, plenty of other people are having the same variable input position issue as me, and their posts led me to the updated Alps touchpad driver on Dell's website.

    Not that it fixes the problem - my touchpad still seems to think it's morphed into an X-Box Kinect - if I wave a hand anywhere near it the insertion point cursor leaps madly around in my Word document. But the Dell driver can detect when you plug in a proper mouse, and disables the touchpad automatically. Problem solved.

    Now I just need to prise my finger and thumb apart so I can mend a pair of my wife's earrings...

  • Writing ... or Just Practicing?

    Deproxied

    • 2 Comments

    Having run out of ideas, and given up Binging a solution for my intermittent connectivity problems around Windows 8, IE 10, and Outlook, it was time to stop playing nicely. Time instead for a day with my head in the server cabinet, a handful of network cables, some sticky labels, and decisive action.

    The problems documented over the past few weeks (see All I Want For Christmas) were still intermittently annoying, as well as being annoyingly intermittent. I was totally unable to track down any DNS problems, despite many hours experimenting with different forwarders, root entries, test scripts, clearing caches, and more.

    I'd logged all dropped packets in ISA server for a day, but there were none related to the problem from the machines under test. Though ISA's performance monitor was consistently reporting an average dropped packet rate of 0.3 per second and I wasted half an hour tracing these back to my wireless access point. Even though all of its fancy USB, printer connection, and media sharing features are turned off it still insists on sending out a network discovery packet every three seconds. Highly annoying.

    Then I read more on the ISA Server blog sites about how using the proxy client changes the behaviour of machines connected to ISA. Of course, I haven't actually installed the proxy client directly since XP days. I just assumed that some clever mechanism in Windows Vista, 7, and 8 used the Gateway/Router setting specified in DHCP to find the proxy server and set themselves up for it automatically.

    What I read suggested that ISA itself is doing DNS lookups in response to requests from clients, whereas a ping or nslookup on the client uses the network DNS server or does its own DNS lookup. So trying to track faults with nslookup after a connection failure was a waste of time. By now I was rapidly tiring of trying to be a network administrator, and I didn't bother following this up any further to see if it really is the case.

    All of which prompted the decision to perform some radical surgery in the server cabinet, and get rid of ISA Server altogether. It's a Hyper-V VM, so it won't reduce the physical server count - but it will simplify administration and backup tasks and, hopefully, resolve my connectivity problems. I replicated all the ISA outbound rules in the firewall of my load-balancing router, which sits between the ISA server and the two ISP modems. A day monitoring the router logs and fine-tuning rules suggested this would work fine.

    Reconfiguring the network was deceptively easy. Simply power off the ISA VM, change the IP address of the router to the same as ISA (the address already specified in the DHCP scope options), and run some network penetration tests. Instantly everything seems to be faster, web page loads are snappier, and no sign of smoke or loud bangs. And if it all goes wrong, or turns out to be a mistake, I still have the ISA Server VM so I can easily revert to the previous configuration.

    But will my simple load-balancing router be able to cope with all that extra firewalling and packet shifting load once I start hammering the network with my usual working-week vigour? It's only an old LinkSys RV042 with a 100 Mbs Ethernet port. Do I need to upgrade to something like the new RV320 instead? I guess I'll soon find out.

    And, of course, the question now is what will I do next if my intermittently annoyingly connectivity problem is still annoyingly intermittent...?

  • Writing ... or Just Practicing?

    Agile Documentation - Tested to Destruction

    • 2 Comments

    Agile development is an important technique here at p&p; and throughout much of Microsoft. However, I'm yet to be convinced that it's a good way of creating user guidance and documentation. It seems to me that the process often gets in the way more than it helps to produce a great final product.

    I've rambled on many times in the past about agile documentation. Most specifically in Can Writers Dance The Agile? and other posts here. Yet I keep thinking it needs deeper investigation - especially as the group I'm officially assigned to, CSI, insists we keep prodding it to see if it works.

    Note: Here at Microsoft, CSI is "Content Services & International". It's probably a bit less exciting than doing clever stuff with fingerprints and DNA, but we do have fancy computers that nearly come close to those you see in the TV versions of CSI. Maybe we should call ourselves "CSI Microsoft," wear white coats, and walk around with a flashlight held over our head.

    Anyway, coming back to the point, we've had another go at agile docs recently. Instead of a solid and agreed structure plan and detailed implementation notes of what we wanted to achieve, we started off with a "vision" (but see this post from a couple of weeks ago) and "brainstorming" to get a list of topics. Then we "asked the audience" with developer and advisory board surveys to see which of the topics they liked most. Next, we threw together some rough notes about each topic and then produced a first draft of each topic document.

    The next stage was multiple reviews. After each review we restructured the content, and often the whole document, to get it closer to the ideal. But, because it's agile, we often changed our mind about what the doc was trying to achieve (remember, there's no detailed implementation notes to guide us here) and completely rewrote it. And then did this again after the next review pointed out the holes left by (or introduced by) the previous reworking. Some documents went through four or more complete restructurings, and several were rewritten twice.

    The agile process also resulted in some of the "envisioned" topics being abandoned, often after they'd been rewritten several times, because - after investigation - they were too hard to define accurately. Or because they turned out to be not really relevant or practical. And as there is no overall structure plan, it was hard to see which topic should contain what section of the content, and how it related to other sections. It also meant that the focus could only ever be at the individual document level rather than the entire guide level, because that isn't defined yet.

    But what we could be sure of was that each individual topic was precise, accurate to the nth degree, and compact with no irrelevant content. This is, of course, extremely important; especially if the content will be used as reference information. But is it still "guidance?" I guess that's the core of the problem. What exactly should "guidance" look like?

    Typical equivalents of the word "guidance" include the obvious ones such as "help" and "advice." However, there are broadly two categories of meaning: "leadership" and "assistance." These almost seem like opposites - one leading from the front and the other pushing from the back. Yet the sub-meanings according to my thesaurus include "direction", "support", "management", and "control." Some of these seem more like they are related to aiding through understanding, whereas others are more related to despotic regulation. I'm going to take a guess that we're aiming for the first of these.

    So did we end up with what we wanted, and does it aid through understanding? It's not completely finished yet and it will be a while before we see any user feedback. And there's no doubt that the content will be extremely useful for the specific users and use cases it addresses. But it still seems like we missed opportunities. The agile process narrowed the focus and transformed the content based on individual reviews of segments, and forced additional depth of detail. It also removed a lot of the general "understanding" content because it already was familiar to the experienced reviewers. Most of all, it resulted in huge amounts of extra work writing and repeatedly updating (and then sometimes discarding) the content.

    Without a predefined (if flexible) structure and an overall feel for how it will all fit together and appear to the readers, there is nothing to prevent this wandering. As a writer, I'm lost if I can't see the finished thing in the back of my mind. It's like driving through a city in your car while blindfolded, and navigating by reversing and choosing a new direction at random every time you hit something.

    Maybe agile is good thing that can help to focus guidance more accurately. Or maybe it just allows the guidance to wander away from the original vision and risk irrelevance. If the original plan was to provide guidance around X and you end up with fabulous documentation of Y instead, did you do a good job?

  • Writing ... or Just Practicing?

    Snakin' All Over

    • 2 Comments

    My new pet snake is installed, working, and really flies. Deathly silent, yet it instantly responds to every command. It's like somebody speeded up the world. Or at least speeded up my television. And, yes, this is a follow-on from last week's rambling post about our new "Mamba" Media Center box from QuietPC.com. In fact, even the title continues the not-quite-a-song theme.

    The long and sometimes tortuous setup and installation is over. It's nestled neatly in the TV cabinet, and after a few days use it really does seem to be a superb machine - and a significant upgrade from the old I-US Media Center box. OK so most of the setup hassle was my fault (more later) because I wanted it to be on my local domain and integrated with the network. It needs to have remote Event Log access turned on, my "failed recording" monitor service installed, a custom screensaver, auto logon, and a few other tweaks.

    What surprised me, though, was the benefits from the new TV cards. The old box had only one PCI slot, whereas most modern tuner cards are PCI-E only these days so I had to choose between terrestrial (DVB-T) and satellite (DVB-S). And none supported HD. The new Mamba has a dual DVB-T2 (HD) and a dual DVB-S2 (HD) card. And, amazingly, Media Center accepted both, and tuned both of them, so that we now get all of the terrestrial and the satellite channels. You can still record from only two tuner instances concurrently (either on the same tuner card or one from each tuner card) and watch a previously recorded program at the same time. But it's wonderful to get back some old favorite channels that aren't on satellite, and to finally be able to get all the HD channels.

    Of course, the actual tuning process is still a pain, and really does need to come closer to the capabilities offered by ordinary TVs that can detect broadcast update signals and automatically retune channels that move around. Media Center has the facility to add new channels, but it never seems to fully work. In the past, when they moved channels around, I had to do a complete re-setup of all the channels - which means getting back the 500+ I don't want and had removed from the guide, and having to go through the laborious process of finding listings for channels where the channel name and the listing name are slightly different. Though maybe in the Windows 8 version of Media Center it will work better. No doubt I'll find out in time.

    The final setup process was made more infuriatingly slow by a couple of unexpected hitches. For some reason, Media Center no longer has an option to start automatically when the system restarts from cold or when a user logs on. I have no idea why this option was removed, and it seems from a web search that lots of people are annoyed about it and have found an equally large number of kludges to fix it, including creating a profile and using a batch file in the \ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\Startup folder. However, another solution seems to be obvious. Create a scheduled task that runs at logon and executes the file %windir%\ehome\ehshell.exe, and set the taskbar to auto-hide.

    But the most annoying quirk was that my custom screensaver that displays details of photos never appeared. All I got was a nausea-inducing scrolling, panning, and zooming screenfull of black and white photos with odd ones occasionally appearing in colour - despite the Lock screen slideshow being turned off and my screensaver properly configured in Windows Personalization settings. I played with this for ages before finally searching the web for solutions. Most of which are totally confusing because the say to turn on the slideshow and then turn off the option to "show the lock screen instead of turning off the screen".

    I even followed the advice on one site to use gpedit to disable the Lock screen altogether, but it made absolutely no difference. After I finally gave up and went back to configuring Media Center I found the screensaver option within the Media Center interface. Which is helpfully turned on by default. The Lock screen slideshow I was trying to get rid of wasn't actually the Lock screen at all. No wonder I had problems! After turning the Media Center screensaver off my own screensaver works fine. Doh!

    I'm still not sure I'd recommend Media Center as a replacement for a normal TV to my non-technical friends, but it really is a superb system if you know something about computers, are prepared to fiddle with it, and accept the few shortcomings such as the usual need for updates and other maintenance tasks. Even the smart TVs I've seen can't compete with the full range of capabilities and flexibility of a powerful computer driving a big wall screen.

    But I have to run. Now that I've got the "Dave" channel back again, there's ten episodes of "The Professionals" from 1978 I need to watch...

  • Writing ... or Just Practicing?

    Defensive Writing

    • 2 Comments

    One of the facts of life when you write technical documentation and guidance is that it will get reviewed by other people, resulting in regular changes to the content as you try to follow shifting advice, conflicting feedback, and suggestions that sometimes even make sense. It doesn't help, of course, if the technology you are documenting is also a moving target.

    I don't profess to be an expert in all the technologies we cover, but I generally have a good grasp of the fundamentals for each one - such as what it's supposed to do, how it does, it, and how you can use it. But I depend on reviewers and feedback to make sure I covered all the relevant points, and that what I've written is accurate as well as being useful.

    Over the years, I've come across many situations where it's useful to write defensively in order to minimize errors and illogical content, and to reduce the work required to get the stuff finished and out of the door. While they might not be applicable to everyone, here's a few things to think about:

    • Don't include a number in the introduction to a list. The number of items will change. A list of four items that starts "The following four types of data store..." will look silly after you add another one in response to reviewers' comments and forget to change it to "five".
    • Look out for overuse of your favorite words. I found I'd used "encompass" three times in one paragraph before I proof-read it. Use a thesaurus (even the Word built-in one) to find equivalent words and phrases.
    • Beware of including numerically accurate information such "costs x" or "is x times faster" because it will be wrong next week. Words such as "considerably", "minimal", and "cost-effective" are often just as useful.
    • "At the time of writing..." makes sense only to you. Put the date in.
    • Check out commonly accepted information before you accept it. For example, Hadoop was originally created at Yahoo!, not by Apache.
    • Beware of your "only" positioning:
      • "Only developers can use feature x to confirm the results" (nobody else can use feature x to do this)
      • "Developers can only use feature x to confirm the results" (developers can't modify feature x)
      • "Developers can use only feature x to confirm the results" (developers can't use any other feature to do this)
      • "Developers can use feature x only to confirm the results" (developers can't use feature x for any other purpose)
    • Leave all the comments in until you go to release. You'll get conflicting feedback from different reviewers and you need the history to figure out why you changed something in the document, and what actually is correct.
    • Get inside your reviewers' heads. Some will comment only on the bits that interest them, so you can't assume the rest is accurate. Others will offer half-thought-through or off-topic suggestions that are not directly relevant (but might be useful elsewhere). Look out for hobby horses and special interest comments that will bloat the content without adding anything useful. Lazy comments such as "You need to cover other stuff here as well" but don't say what you missed probably need to go back to the reviewer, but don't expect much additional help.
    • Beware of the cleverness of word processors such as Microsoft Word. Removing a comment can sometimes insert a space, which can be a problem in code listings. Deleting the word before a word that starts with punctuation (such as ".NET") removes the space before the word. For example, deleting "Microsoft" from "the Microsoft .NET framework" results in "the.NET framework".
    • Minimize deep linking by linking to the home page of another site where possible, and tell the reader where to look, as long as it does not make the reference unusable. For example, "See the documentation for feature x on the [link]targetsite.com[/link] website or "Search [link]targetsite.com[/link] for "Configuring feature x". You get fewer broken links this way.
    • If you use numbered figures or schematics, and don't (or can't) use the automatic figure numbering features of your word processor, minimize the times you reference the figure by number because you'll add and remove figures over time. You can start the paragraph before or after the figure with "This screenshot shows..." or "In this schematic, feature x is ...". Referring to a figure in a different topic by number is risk taking at the extreme.
    • Proof-read your content in more than one format. If you proof it only in your word processor, you'll probably miss errors that become obvious when it's displayed as HTML. I'm not sure why this is - perhaps it's to do with word positioning due to the layout and line wrap. Or familiarity with the content in the format and layout where it was originally created.

    And finally, my own hobby horse: always remember the phrase "Time flies like an arrow but fruit flies like a banana". Use "such as x" rather than "like x" when giving examples of things...

  • Writing ... or Just Practicing?

    Semantically Speaking...

    • 2 Comments

    So I've temporarily escaped from Azure to lend a hand with, as Monty Python would say, something completely different. And it's a bit like coming home again, because I'm back with the Enterprise Library team. Some of them even remembered me from last time (though I'm not sure that's a huge advantage).

    Enterprise Library has changed almost beyond recognition while I've been away. Several of the application blocks have gone, and there are some new ones. One even appeared and then disappeared again during my absence (the Autoscaling block). And the blocks are generally drifting apart so that they can be used stand-alone more easily, especially in environments such as Azure.

    It's interesting that, when I first started work with the EntLib team, we were building the Composite Application Block (CAB) - parts of which sort of morphed into the Unity Dependency Injection mechanism. And the other separate application blocks were slowly becoming more tightly integrated into a cohesive whole. Through versions 3, 4, and 5 they became a one-stop solution for a range of cross-cutting concerns. But now one or two of the blocks are starting to reach adolescence, and break free to seek their fortune in the big wide world outside.

    One of these fledglings is the block I'm working on now. The Semantic Logging Application Block is an interesting combination of bits that makes it easier to work with structured events. It allows you to capture events from classes based on the .NET 4.5 and above EventSource class, play about with the events, and store them in a range of different logging destinations. As well as text files and databases, there's an event sink that writes events to Azure table storage (so I still haven't quite managed to escape from the cloud).

    The latest version of the block itself is available from NuGet, and we should have the comprehensive documentation available any time now. It started out as a quick update of the existing docs to match the new features in the block, but has expanded into a refactoring of the content into a more logical form, and to provide a better user experience. Something I seem to spend my life doing - I keep hoping that the next version of Word will have an "Auto-Refactor" button on the ribbon.

    More than anything, though, is the useful experience it's providing in learning more about structured (or semantic) logging. I played with Event Tracing for Windows (ETW) a few times in the past when trying to consolidate event logs from my own servers, and gave up when the level of complexity surpassed by capabilities (it didn't take long). But EventSource seems easy to work with, and I've promised myself that every kludgy utility and tool I write in future will expose proper modern events with a structured and typed payload.

    This means that I can use the clever and easy to configure Out-of-Process Host listener that comes with the Semantic Logging Application Block to write them all to a central database where I can play with them. And the neat thing is that, by doing this, I can record the details of the event but just have a nice useful error message for the user that reflects modern application practice. Such as "Warning! Your hovercraft is full of eels...", or maybe just "Oh dear, it's broken again..."

  • Writing ... or Just Practicing?

    All I Want For Christmas...

    • 2 Comments

    So I continue to battle with Windows 8.1 and Outlook 2103 on my nice big Dell workstation. Our IT support department have given up on me, saying it's obviously a problem with my own network configuration. And it looks like they are correct. It's just a shame they can't tell me what the problem is.

    For a long while Outlook has been doing strange things. It had a few days of keeping count of how many messages I sent during the day (see Downwardly Upgraded) but that problem seems to have gone away again. It also regularly loses its connection to the mail server and then restores it - sometimes immediately but at other times it takes several minutes. And, best of all, it waits about ten minutes before displaying the Windows 8 desktop notification of new emails. Usually I've read and deleted them by the time it pops up.

    The same issues occur on other computers as well, both Windows 8 and Windows 7, but only when connected to my internal domain and going out through my ISA proxy server and load-balancing router to one of my ISPs. Bypassing all this, and plugging directly into the back of the ADSL modem, seems to solve the problem. So it's increasingly looking like an internal network issue.

    I've checked all the DNS servers I use as Forwarders and they resolve fine. There are no event log warnings in any of the servers. The ISA proxy server log reveals no denied requests to my email host, and only one or two to anywhere else - certainly not enough dropped packets to justify the problems with Outlook. I turned on logging in Outlook and used the new Microsoft Message Analyser to read them, but I can't make any sense of the contents. I tried network packet sniffing, but that revealed nothing useful from the few bits I could decipher.

    And then there's browser. Occasionally it has a spell of not being able to find sites. Today it couldn't find Bing for about five minutes yet other sites worked fine. Then it couldn't find the MSDB Blogs site. Other days it can't find anything for several minutes, then it all starts working again. Yet everything else seems to work just fine. My internet radio plays radio, Lync links, Team Foundation Server serves, and News has the up to date news.

    I've tried disconnecting the modem for the cable ISP connection and just using ADSL to a different ISP, and vice versa. I've run network diagnostics and DNS validation checks. I've monitored the performance of the ISA 2006 server, and double-checked all the rules. I've played with the routing tables in the separate hardware load balancer. I tried specifying the proxy server settings manually in the browser. All to no avail.

    Maybe my network is just too complicated. It's left over from the days when I was an IT consultant (well, jumped-up writer and occasional conference speaker actually) when I needed lots of infrastructure for developing and testing the few applications I built for customers. And, I guess, because I enjoyed playing with hardware. Perhaps it's time to review that decision. Do I actually need:

    • A file server
    • A Hyper-V host
    • A cold-swap backup Hyper-V host
    • An ISA server
    • A web server
    • A SQL Server
    • A domain with three domain controllers
    • A 24-port switch, three 4 port switches, and 300 yards of Cat-5
    • A wireless access point
    • Load-balanced routing to two ISPs
    • A NAS, a backup NAS, and two more for archiving

    ...just to use Word, Visio, and Visual Studio? Probably not. And all of a sudden I can see why my electricity bill is so high.

    Perhaps my Christmas present to myself will be a nice hardware firewall that I can just plug everything else into and forget about it...

Page 4 of 41 (324 items) «23456»