I am not a Pro Blogger, I am a Professional Blog Reader.

Three very good reasons I'm not a Pro Blogger...

1. If I had to write I would starve!
2. My current job, my livelihood, doesn't depend on blogging.
3. I am not engaged in a business that I need to promote or represent via a blog.

I am a Professional Blog reader ( a professional who reads blogs )

Yes, I know that was just a matter of a little linguistic slight of hand (mouth?) but after the smoke clears and the mirrors are removed the import remains: I, as a professional, read blogs. As a Systems Administrator it is essential that I maintain an up-to-the-minutes perspective on the world of technology.

I was the guy at my office that subscribed to every trade journal (slick) that I could find a blow-in card for. They were killing millions of trees just for me. It was normal for me to receive 1 or 2 slicks per business work day. That works out to ~28 trade slicks per month. There was paper-based information overload, not to mention waste basket/recycle box overload.

Then it was e-mailed technical briefing/product/service newsletters. Zettabytes and yattabytes of electrons gave up their little negative charges, figuratively speaking, to over-stuff my e-mail in-box. Now I was receiving weekly newsletters from roughly the same number of sources (e.g. 28 sources times 4 weeks equals 112 newsletters.) I spent more time deleting than I did reading.

Blogs are the answer to information overload. First is the timeliness of the available information. Professional and business blogs, as well as personal blogs, appear to be updated in near-real time. Second it the usual brevity of the information offered. The medium has shaped the message. Blog postings are short, sweet and to the point.

Google Reader Trends indicates...From your 101 subscriptions, over the last 30 days you read 3,397 items. More correctly I have scanned nearly 34 hundred items. Subscribing to blog feeds has allowed me to manage and process information in a much more efficient manner. I am able to spend less time and have evergreen information on the technology world around me.

...that is why I am a professional blog reader.

I need to get a life...

I was curious so I signed up at Second Life. Learned to walk, talk and fly. Managed to stumble and tumble around for a while and then it hit me...like a ton of virtual bricks... allow me to elucidate...

05:00 Pager goes off - sent by my primary network management system - "Wake up call." Serves as my programmable alarm clock _and_ tests the paging system.

05:30ish...
First thing in the morning I usually check my PDA for my daily schedule and then wifi for my gMail. A quick read of the gNews followed by a check of my gReader feeds... kiss my lovely wife (the Saint) and then dropping teenagers off at highschool. Yes, I did remember my laptop, my cell phone, my PDA and my pager, thank you very much... "Make sure you e-mail me if your mother is going to pick you up after school."

07:00ish
Visual check of the Simplex Fire Alarm system on my way across the lobby, green is good. Check the snail mail. Checking for 'red-light' messages on printers, fax machines and copiers as I wind through the office. Through two locked doors to access my office and the network operations center.

Check the status of the network. Hobbit reporting which systems are on-line, which have system messages, which PCs have recently been rebooted. Hobbit also displays Server status - CPU loads, disk utilization, tcp connections and more. MRTG generates traffic graphs for key network connections. This big peak means the back-ups ran on schedule last night. This long sustained peak means that Sally is trying to send Halloween pictures to her sister again.

Fire up gReader on my main Slackware system (v.11 running KDE 3.5, tight) start in on the professional blogs...Trade Slicks (magazines) for the 21st century. Dock the laptop and fire it up... corporate e-mail - good the spam filter is working. Load the CCTV application - double check that all the cameras are on-line, good. Generate the Internet proxy report for last week and send a copy to the boss.

07:25 Pager goes off - sent by secondary network management system, "Morning staff meeting." Snag my first cup of office coffee then off to the morning briefing...

I need to get a life...yeah right, just what I need, a Second Life.

New Business Computers

Business computing is not evolving as fast as the technology of PCs.

Take Joe Clerical for instance. An evaluation of his PC usage shows that he spends 10-15 minutes per day on company related e-mail. He works with an Access based program (front end for an SQL database) for 4.75 hours and he is allowed to surf the Internet on his breaks (2 x 15 min.) and lunch half-hour.

Were it not for the advances Microsoft has made with Active Directory and Domain management Joe might still be using Windows NT on a Pentium I. It is very difficult from a business perspective to reconcile buying Joe a new PC complete with OS and a new Office suite when his job requirements have not changed in the past four plus years.

Perhaps Microsoft should take a long hard look at their B-to-B model. By forcing upgrades they are pushing business folks to the very edge of their patience. This could be particularly dangerous when the competition, albeit immature and scattered, cost so very little by comparison.

Security Alert: Privacy is dead!

Two (count 'em, 2) years ago I posted this (adult content) which was a repost of a "Privacy " rant that I had originally posted at Winextra.

Today I followed a link pointed to by noted security specialist Bruce Schneier which took me to an interesting article on Data Mining.

In response to Doug Karr: Protecting Software and Customers from Counterfeiters?

Doug Karr's original post... When I tried to respond to Doug's questions my answer just seemed to grow beyond a comment post... so I put it here...

What follows will appear to be off-topic initially but I assure you it will circle around to the issues that you have brought up...

I am a dyed-in-the-wool Slackware Linux advocate. I am particular about Slackware. I am particular about Linux. These two combined means that I am particular about Open Source Software. This in turn means that I am particular about “free” software.

I have had the luxury, the inclination, the opportunity and the technological resources to become a moderately fluent Linux 'Business' user. (I have 7 linux servers in production providing a number of "back office" services (e.g. firewalls, proxy, HTTP, router/gateway, alpha-numeric paging, and network management).) It has taken time and effort to capitalize on my situation. Time and effort that most likely is not available to Joe Average.

I have sampled many of the mainstream Linux distributions (distros). I have had the opportunity to try a myriad of avant-nerdy-custom distros. The mainstream distros are as proprietary as a well know commercial OS. The smaller specialty distros are keen, neat and interesting but lack a polished finish. Slackware, the work of Patrick Volkerding, is the seminal foundation of Linux distributions. One of its many claims to fame is that it puts the onus of responsibility on the user. While a few "features" are turned on the rest of the configuration is left up to preferences of the person using Slackware. In addition Slack, as it is lovingly called, is not natively encumbered with the burden of a Graphical User Interface (GUI). Every aspect of Slack can be configured using a simple text editor.

[I am supposed to add here; not for the faint of heart.]

Linux is born on the back of Open Source Software (OSS). OSS is an affirmation of the value of software as a contribution to a larger community. It, software, is written because it needs to be written the way a painting need to be painted. Occasionally an artist will paint "on commission" as a programmer will develop a specific program for a client. More often than not the artist/programmer will create to fulfill the need of creation.

The business model that has evolved out of OSS is an acknowledgement of where the true value lies in software. It is best seen in the "Distro" business model. The value is not in the software but in the packaging and integrating of the software into the distro package. Red Hat was quick to tell me that the support cost I was asked to incur was not to "purchase" the software but rather to cover the cost of ongoing support for _all_ of its constituent elements. I was assured that the software was available for download from a number of sources at no cost. [BTW: I received the same position statement from Novell's SUSE - so this isn't vendor specific.]

This business model extends to individual applications as well. PostgreSQL, the RDBMS with the difficult to pronounce name, is a very good example. PostgreSQL is readily available for download at no cost. It comes complete with _very_ comprehensive documentation. Additionally there are publicly accessible forums where usage discussions and even some problem solving is available, again for free. If however you want or need to please the PHB by being able to point to a service contract that stipulates the terms of support - PostgreSQL is more than happy to oblige, for a price. Do not mistake my levity in this matter for a slight against PostgreSQL. Their application is professional at every turn as is their support. It just so happens that they have chosen to place monetary value not on a world class program but on world class service and support.

After all that Slackware Linux OSS evangelizing I now put on my professional hat: I am the Manager of Information Systems for a mid-sized manufacturing concern here in the mid-west. We do business the old fashioned way - Microsoft Windows: 9 Servers and 70+ desktops. We use Windows as a business resource because that is what our most important business resources, people, are trained and proficient with. We use Windows because our second most valuable business resources, our customers, use Windows. We use Windows because the business applications we depend on are Windows based. So, regardless of my personal preference I am a staunch supporter of Microsoft Windows.

I have also 'enjoyed' the polite invitation from Microsoft to run an internal audit and verify that all of my PCs and servers running Windows were and are duly licensed. I assumed that if I had not complied with their polite request I would have ended up on a list to be visited by the BSA. I am not a lawyer and I do not suggest that I fully understand the dotted "i's" and crossed 't's" of the EULA but I am relatively sure Microsoft was and will continue to be within their rights to respectfully offer such 'Invitations'. My position, whether I personally like it or not, is that I do business using Microsoft products and I am honor bound to adhere to a contractual agreement regarding their use.

In my view the question of whether I should be saddled with the responsibility of verifying and validating the implementation of their product is mute. Caveat emptor! "Buyer beware" is the watch word that we should live by. I view the verification and validation mechanisms as just another type of 'dongle'. In reviewing the Microsoft Position I was heartened to hear that only minor punitive measures will be taken against those who are not in compliance. Of particular note is Microsoft's insistence that they will not prevent non-compliant instances of Windows from obtaining critical updates. I take this as a significant gesture of good will.

As to the cost verses the worth of Microsoft products I have one observation; contemporary OS and software customers expect the same functionality from their home PC that they do from their business PC. In many cases people have higher expectations from their personal computers than they do of the PCs that they use at work. I believe this disparity of expectation significantly colors the "supply and demand" market influences. To put a finer point of this I believe that Microsoft is on the right track offering 'Windows Lite' to burgeoning third world nations who have severely limited technological resources. (I know, this is a departure from my pervious rant regarding Microsoft pricing schedule. See Microsoft Redux ) On the other hand, if Joe Average expects his home PC to perform as well or better than his office PC then Joe should be expected to pay for that performance.

The problem is that Windows is not a qualifiable or even quantifiable product. It does not wear out nor is it [intentionally] designed to stop working after a specified period of time. It is not, in and of itself, a dependable income generator over time. That coupled with the fact that software (OSs and Applications) are easily duplicated means that Microsoft has very little to actually market unless they impose arbitrary value limits. Their first imposition is the actual price of the product, the unit cost. Second are the measures they impose on the customer to insure the adherence to contractual obligation. Finally, Microsoft should be acknowledged for making each successive version of their flagship product Windows better. It is this value that we as consumers should measure when considering our next OS or application purchase.

The OSS model depends on free distribution to extend applications and distros into the greater computing community. Then it is a matter of trial by fire. If the app or distro meets community imposed standards of excellence it flourishes. When it does succeed then its value is acknowledged and the authors can exercise their right to realize monetary rewards for the real value of their efforts. There are some cases where an author will actually choose not to accept remuneration for their apps or distros but instead use the creditability of their success to further their careers in other ways. A good example of this is nmap, acknowledged widely as the premier port scanner. Nmap author fyodor@insecure.org doesn't (yet) charge for his program but he is acknowledged in his field as an expert and sought after as such.

So it would appear that Microsoft is in the unenviable position of having to establish and then protect its product in order to realize a monetary return. OSS, on the other hand, does not have to protect its product and is able to capitalize on the real value that the community places upon it. Microsoft must place demands on the public. OSS receives support from the public. Microsoft will inevitably crumble beneath its own weight. OSS will just continue to grow in its freedom.

Small Network Needs

... or...
Every important thing I know I learned from building a small network.


In the latter half of the 1990's I had the luxury of building a network environment from scratch. I cite this as an exceptional circumstance because very rarely does one get to start with a clean blank canvas when implementing a network. Almost always there are existing infrastructures to contend with and legacy technologies to accommodate. I found myself in a circumstance where there was no pre-existing conditions. I was given liberty to grow a network from a single seed. From that seed a small to mid-sized network has evolved but not without learning curves and growing pains. In recounting the development and evolution of this network I hope to emphasize a few very important lessons learned.

• Small networks require the same infrastructure components that larger networks require.
• Planning, planning, planning!
• Networks are a very good example of "Pay-me-now-or pay-me-later"
• Computers really only do one job at a time well. Only people think they can multi-task.
• 100% Over-Pull - Anticipate growth!

Small Business Owners beware... Small networks require the same infrastructure components that larger networks require.

This is a statement-of-the-obvious for any Information Systems Manager worth his or her salt. Unfortunately it comes as a HUGE and dissappointing surprise to most small business owners. Too often the refrain is, "All I want to do is get my e-mail and run some kind of simple ERP application." Unfortunately there are three deceptive inclusions in such a statement. First is that there is no such thing as a simple ERP application. Second, getting e-mail is considerably more involved that just dialing into an ISP. Finally, the largest deception by far is the assertion "all I want to do..." These are the famous last words (actually first words) of Feature Creep, the enxorable march of additional functions and "needs" that suddenly appear as soon as the network is established. Feature Creep is almost always rationalized after the fact by saying, "Well, we already paid all this money, we should at least be able to (fill in the blank)."

We will revisit this point ... again and again ...

Planning, planning, planning!

The best way to combat the "all I want to do..." attitude is to determine exactly what you really do want to do. Ask all the questions first - they are cheap at the price and the answers will offer clear direction for the overall project. Start by determining the general responsibilities of your proposed network environment. File Sharing means a central repository, a file Server (1) that network users can get to. Preventing labor from accessing management files means having a user security system. Print Sharing means that both the computers and the printers have to be interconnected. E-mail means that in some fashion the network has to be able to connect the internet. E-mail, in some cases, may require a Server (1). Having a web site means that a Web Server (1) must be accessible by the Internet. Keeping your information safe means having many different layers of security; firewalls, anti-virus programs, anti-spyware programs, user security systems and reporting systems.

Then there are physical issues to address. How will users PCs communicate? Will you install a wired network? This will include distribution devices (switches and hubs). If you implement fiber-optic cabling then suitable converters will be needed. All of these constituent elements will need suitable places to reside. Most often these will be in closets or phonerooms. Network resources need to be physically secure. It does not good to have a strong password when a thief can steal your file server. Even closets and phonerooms can be vulnerable to someone walking in and "jacking" into your network.

Then there is the realistic evaluation of the actual number of users on a network. All too often I have heard something like 'only the main partners and their assistants...' This suggesting that the number of users is relatively small. Serious followup finds that there are 14 partners, each having a personal secretary (14) and an assistant (14). Each office suite shares two printers (14). Seven of the partners use a laptop in addition to their desktop (7). The HR Manager and her secretary are not considered partners but they use a PC(2) and two printers(2). The receptionist, three records clerks and the Building/Security Manager all use PCs (5) and share two printers (2). By my simple count the users PCs total 55 and the printers total 18. So in this example of a Law Office there are 73 connections that have to be made, not counting any of the servers (at least 3 from the above example).

Computers really only do one job at a time well. Only people think they can multi-task.

Almost to a person small business owners have asked, "Why can't a secretary use that server, the one locked in a closet, to type up invoices?" Well, the most obvious answer is, 'You shouldn't lock secretarys in closets.' The real answer is very simple and very dissappointing. Computers are really only single-taskers. The best scenario in a small business setting is one server is assigned one role or responsibility. Many of my counterparts in the industry will take exception with this but my response is just as simple as my rule. If a server "crashes" how many roles or responsibilities would a business operator like to lose for the duration of the crash? If the File Server malfunctions the E-mail is still operational as is the E-Commerce site that runs on the Web Server.

This highlights a paradigm of business that is worthy of note. The network is not the 'thing'. The network is the communication channel that business 'things' use to transfer valuable information. The network is a utility, not unlike water and electricity, that business can make good use of but are not directly dependent on. Networks don't, as a rule, do business - they make business work better. This brings me to the awareness that computing the ROI of a network capital investment is as difficult as determining the value of running water or dependable electricity. On the other hand, an E-Commerce system that increases annual sales by 200% can clearly be evaluated in terms of ROI.

100% Over-Pull - Anticipate growth

When estimating the number of strands of fiber-optic cable to pull between any two given points I apply the '100% Over-Pull' rule. At a minimum I will specify twice as many strands as I anticipate using. More often than not I will specify 300 - 500% over-pull. Experience has shown me that networks grow in the same way that Features Creep. Once a resource such as a network infractructure is established then everybody will find yet another use for it. So where initially 2 of 6 strand are dedicated to the digital network all of a sudden an additional 6 strands are needed for the transmission of CCTV images.

"Wait! You never mentioned anything about CCTV!!! We thought you were talking about computer networks." It is true that I have been focused on computers but again the network is not the 'thing'. In the case of a fiber-optic network infrastructure it can be a resource to any system that can speak "glass" - computers, CCTV, audio, telephone, HVAC controllers, and more.

The same '100% Over-Pull' rule applies to computers and networking. Just like nature abhores a vacuum, business will grow to fill an empty network. Business will grow very quickly to fill an empty network. So it is imperative to anticipate growth. A 300-500% growth rate is not unusual in the first 5 years of a network. This brings us back to my first point - Small networks require the same infrastructure components that larger networks require. (Did I mention we would revisit it again and again... ) Where the real value can be realized is in the correct specification the first time when building a network infrastructure. And of course this correct specification is an out growth of my second point ( Planning, planning, planning! ) married to the spirit of the 100% Over-Pull rule.

Everything I have offered here is about having realistic expectations. Too often under-sizing our needs and objectives leads us to make less than economically valuable business decisions. To be fair, our fathers and their fathers ran businesses with yellow legal pads and Ticondaroga #2 pencils. The supply-and-demand business rules that served them well just don't seem to stand up to JIT thinking and Business@Internet.speed. When we take the first steps out of our father's business paradigm we must be prepared to hit the cyber-space surfing (...hit the ground running...)

--------------------------------

William Meloney is an Information Systems Manager for a small mid-western manufacturing concern. The views expressed within are his alone and do not reflect those of anyone else, living or dead. Do not operate heavy machinery. Be sure you can sleep for 8 full hours before taking. If a condition lasting more than four hour occurs contact your physician immediatly.