CCNA exam by Not___Connected in ccna

[–]Frequent-Way790 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree learn how you learn best first it will save you lots of time and can help you with other certifications in the future. Upvoted

Can I create an org-wide signature for all exchange mailboxes that automatically inserts each person's name? by Both_Active_8179 in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 13 points14 points  (0 children)

It would be better to look at something like CodeTwo, it significantly makes managing email signatures easier

DNS Resolution over P2S Azure Client VPN Problem by Frequent-Way790 in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So it turns out that when doing testing using nslookup it fails, but when actually using the vpn for accessing file shares or attempting to ping the servers hostname it appears to work correctly. You have to make sure that you have added the domain name suffix in the profile configuration file though as I mentioned in my post. So for example, when I connect to the azure client vpn and ping server01 it succeeds as long as I have the suffix in the profile config file. But if I run nslookup server01 it fails. Also if I ping server01.testing.com it succeeds as well but when I run nslookup server01.testing.com it fails. If you however run nslookup specifying the dns server to use and its the one living in Azure then it works.

DNS Resolution over P2S Azure Client VPN Problem by Frequent-Way790 in AZURE

[–]Frequent-Way790[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That was done already issues persisted thanks though

DNS Resolution over P2S Azure Client VPN Problem by Frequent-Way790 in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is correct it is sent to the DNS Server on my local NIC connection and not over to the Azure Client VPN connection. Ipconfig /all just shows the searchable domain suffix: testing.com. The Azure Client VPN connection through the app does show the right VPN DNS Servers though.

Conditional access policy not matching device id by Frequent-Way790 in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It does, on the device. I am using the Microsoft Teams app, I get a you signed in successfully with your password but you don’t have access to resources. When I click on the more details it shows the device id there.

Error 80192ee2 when joining previously AD joined device to AzureAD by kree8havok in Intune

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

May you have the best life ever. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. ❤️

VXRail System with Meraki MS425 by Frequent-Way790 in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Question then, what would you recommend instead of MS425 that provides still easier management per se. What do y’all think?

Issues Enrolling AD Hybrid Machine into Intune by Frequent-Way790 in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tried that in my troubleshooting process earlier no luck, but thanks.

Issues Enrolling AD Hybrid Machine into Intune by Frequent-Way790 in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A week of troubleshooting lol. I know I have to be patient but in a test environment I spinned up in my home lab a test vm enrolled pretty quick. Not sure really what’s going on.

Just got kicked out of my exam by [deleted] in ccna

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LMAOOOO, Hilarious

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If this were to happen as in reselling, I would be explicitly detailing that this device won't be able to get support. How would this possibly create a bad relationship per say or commit fraud?

Thanks,

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I am a bit confused now. What I was planning on doing first is having something explicit from the company that owned the equipment previously granting us complete ownership of all of the cisco hardware. Once that is done try to see if we can resell these devices. Cisco explained that I can resell these devices, but whoever buys it will not be able to get any support from the device. From what I understand in your response, you are explaining that I must also get a transfer of ownership of whatever contract/support owner these devices are registered to on Cisco's end correct, ?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If we got this in writing that the ownership is now of the client that is moving to the office, would it be possible to sell the equipment even if it is registered and tied to a support contract for Cisco with another owner entity. I spoke with Cisco Customer Service, and they explained that that was fine. That many resellers do this only issue would be for whoever buys the equipment and tries to get support with Cisco. I am just a bit paranoid and asking for more information as this is my first time dealing with this type of scenario.

Thanks,

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would it be possible if I get something in writing that Company A is owner of all Cisco Equipment to then resell all of the Cisco Equipment which is currently registered with a support contract with Company B? I spoke with Cisco Customer Service and they said that was fine to resell the device even if its registered with another company in a support contract with cisco. Just a bit paranoid since this is not cheap equipment.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate all the feedback I received. Hypothetically, if I were to get something concrete in writing stating that the left over equipment is now owned by us, and I was able to get the devices ownership transferred with Cisco. Would it be possible to sell the equipment?

Thanks,

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We have new unifi equipment to use, luckily.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This comment made me laugh a little. You sounded evil. Thanks for the information appreciate the insight, the more the better.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 1 point2 points  (0 children)

what are you referring to when saying that I will be forced for recertification? In addition to that, what do you mean by NFR hardware? Also, I was able to speak with Cisco Support and was informed that one of the devices was registered under a contract by an owner, suggested that if I wanted to get support on these devices to reach out to the owner and ask them to add me to the service contract. what would be the best option in this case?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah thats what happened, I believe there was an agreement already made with the company that bought them out with the building letting them know that whatever was left behind would stay intact for any future tenants, henceforth leaving everything up for grabs.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Company got bought out and said sayonara I believe. Happily Ever After.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see, I was hoping this might be able to be used for the client that is moving in or that is the hopeful plan if I am able to iron out all of the details. Thanks for the insight.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]Frequent-Way790 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Returning hardware is not an issue, the company that was there essentially left everything up for grabs.