Paging @Tom-Elliott
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/29e6e/29e6e23e2e47fc993a48e718811180309c1fa6ab" alt=""
Posts made by MRCUR
-
RE: Service Modules in new Client?
@Wayne-Workman This is exactly what @george1421 linked to earlier and I mentioned below.
-
RE: R8293 - Old Fog client fails hostname change
@Joe-Schmitt Thanks for the confirmation Joe. That is what I expected and why I reported this as a bug. We will eventually move everything to the new client but that is not something that’s going to happen in 5 minutes with our number of clients/images/etc. and number of people working on this.
-
RE: Service Modules in new Client?
@george1421 @RobertD Second the suggestion of LAPS. That is the appropriate way to manage local admin passwords in an AD environment.
-
RE: R8293 - Old Fog client fails hostname change
@adukes40 This is an issue with the old Fog client, not the new one.
-
RE: R8293 - Old Fog client fails hostname change
Also - Apache log viewer doesn’t work in the Fog UI for me on this rev. Was working previously.
-
R8293 - Old Fog client fails hostname change
R8293/SVN5774 - Using the old Fog client with Win 7 x64 Ent. Clients are unable to update hostname. (Timestamps below don’t match because I pulled at different times.)
The local client log reports:
6/29/2016 10:22 AM FOG::HostnameChanger The remote server returned an error: (500) Internal Server Error. 6/29/2016 10:22 AM FOG::HostnameChanger at System.Net.WebClient.DownloadDataInternal(Uri address, WebRequest& request) at System.Net.WebClient.DownloadString(Uri address) at FOG.HostNameChanger.changeHostName()
Apache log:
[29/Jun/2016:10:05:08 -0400] "GET /fog/service/hostname.php?mac=70:5A:B6:B2:C7:65 HTTP/1.1" 500 394 "-" "-" 172.16.233.58
-
RE: r5767 Host is not registered / Invalid MAC after I set an image
@Tom-Elliott I will update later today and test again. Load doesn’t seem to be an issue:
-
RE: r5767 Host is not registered / Invalid MAC after I set an image
@Tom-Elliott The odd “host is already registered” message doesn’t show up on SVN5774, but registering is still oddly slow. The only part that is slow is the “Attempting to register host…” part. Once it actually starts moving through the inventory it’s fine. Not a huge deal functionally, just noticeably slower than it was on any previous build.
-
RE: R8273 - Group "Service Settings" do not apply
@Tom-Elliott Confirmed resolved. Thanks Tom!
-
RE: R8289 - Pending MAC constant alert
@Tom-Elliott Thanks Tom. I’ll use that if the alert returns with the blank host report. It’s not come back since I did “approve all” a few hours ago.
-
RE: R8273 - Group "Service Settings" do not apply
@Tom-Elliott Seems to be working for setting everything, however, if I uncheck all the options I get a blank page with the message “No values passed”.
-
RE: r5767 Host is not registered / Invalid MAC after I set an image
@Tom-Elliott I do see an “error” that “The host is already registered” when registering a host for the first time. This shows on the same line as “Done, on to imaging” (when that option is selected). Doesn’t seem to actually stop anything from moving forward, but the information being displayed is a bit odd.
-
R8289 - Pending MAC constant alert
R8289/SVN5772 - The pending MAC alert is always showing. Clicking the link in the alert to go to the report screen results in no computers being returned “No results found”. Clicking the “approve all” button does make the popup go away.
-
RE: r5767 Host is not registered / Invalid MAC after I set an image
@Tom-Elliott I think this is fixed now. Registering a host took considerably longer than before but it did eventually go through.
-
RE: R8273 - Group "Service Settings" do not apply
@Tom-Elliott The one I was testing with had 30 hosts. I don’t think we have any groups with more than 60 or so.
-
RE: r5767 Host is not registered / Invalid MAC after I set an image
@Tom-Elliott I can test if you need.
-
R8273 - Group "Service Settings" do not apply
R8274/SVN 5764 - When using a group, if you try to set the Service Settings for the group it doesn’t apply. UI doesn’t indicate any issues, but if you check hosts that are members of the group, they do not have the settings set. Enabling/disabling services on an individual host appears to work properly.
-
RE: Node status - Online/Offline and better offline handling
This is only somewhat related, but why in the world are you not monitoring the Fog servers with whatever network monitoring software is in place?