Search Results

Search found 3 results on 1 pages for 'joxl'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Mac OS X Server Open Directory does not push Software Update settings to clients

  - by joxl

  I have an Xserve G5 running Mac OS X Server 10.5.8 configured as an Open Directory master. I have also enabled and configured Software Update service on the machine. The SUS is configured to serve Tiger, Leopard and Snow Leopard clients (see http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=10297359#10297359) The clients bound to the OD are a variety of Mac's running OS X 10.4, 10.5 or 10.6. In Workgroup Manager, I have created 3 machine groups for each client OS. Each group is configured with a custom SUS URL, and the managed client computers are members accordingly (see http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=10493154#10493154) My problem is that the server pushes the SUS settings to some of the client machines, but not all. When I first configured all this stuff on the server (a few weeks ago) I was closely monitoring a few of the client machines to confirm that they received the custom settings. I noticed that some of the clients (10.4/5/6 alike) seemed to get the settings immediately, others didn't show the new settings until after a reboot. As I said, results are mixed across OS's, but some clients will not "sync" at all. My immediate thought was to unbind/rebind the problematic machines. I did this on several client computers with no success. For example, today I was working on one of the Tiger clients. I noticed it was not pointed at my local SUS, so I checked the OD binding; it was fine. Just to be sure I unbound the machine. Next, I checked WM and confirmed the computer record was gone. I noticed the machine group still had a residual (broken?) member from the unbound client; I manually removed this. Finally, I re-bound the client to OD and re-added the machine to it's correct group in WM. Unfortunately, the client still pings apple's SUS for updates. Just to play it safe I rebooted the client, but to no avail, it will not see my local SUS. To confirm that there is nothing wrong with the server, or the client's connection to it, forcefully pointed the machine at my SUS: sudo defaults write /Library/Preferences/com.apple.SoftwareUpdate CatalogURL "$LOCAL_SUS_URL" and the machine successfully updated off my local server. Great, successful updates, but problem not solved. I've done exhaustive reading on discussions.apple.com (not saying I read everything, I'm just saying I have read a lot) without a good answer. The discouraging thing is that a lot of OD problems I've read about only result in the sysadmin completely reinstalling the server, or OD, or some other similarly heavy-handed operation. At this point, I am not willing to go that route. I still have hope that I can find the reason for this flaky behavior. If anyone can point me in a helpful direction it would be much appreciated. EDIT: Indeed, some files are being pushed to the client: # from client machine: $ sudo find /Library -type f -name com.apple.SoftwareUpdate.plist /Library/Managed Preferences/com.apple.SoftwareUpdate.plist /Library/Managed Preferences/username/com.apple.SoftwareUpdate.plist /Library/Preferences/com.apple.SoftwareUpdate.plist A few weeks ago, prior to my (previously mentioned) modifications, the SUS was still running "stock". Which meant it could not serve SL (10.6) machines. At that time, the Software Update settings were setup in WM under User Groups. This didn't make any sense because some users work on multiple machines with different OS's. Before creating Machine Groups in WM, I deleted all the SU settings from the User Group Preferences. This just makes the whole thing more confusing, because when I see a file here: /Library/Managed Preferences/username/com.apple.SoftwareUpdate.plist I assume it's still remaining from the "old" settings, because I wouldn't think a Machine Setting belongs there. Despite all the com.apple.SoftwareUpdate.plist hanging around under the Managed Preferences, why does the client machine still call home to Apple and not my SUS? # on client machine: $ date Tue Jan 25 17:01:46 EST 2011 $ softwareupdate --list Software Update Tool Copyright 2002-2005 Apple No new software available. switch terminals... # on server: $ tail -n1 /var/log/swupd/swupd_access_log 10.x.x.x - - [25/Jan/2011:15:54:29 -0500] XXXX POST "/cgi-bin/SoftwareUpdateServerStats" 200 13 ... Notice the date of the client softwareupdate and the latest access to the SUS server; the server never heard a peep from that client.

  Read the article

• Email delivery management grievances

  - by joxl

  The question I have may be more of principle than anything else, but here's my dilemma. I manage an email system for a small company (about 20 email users). We own a plain-letter .com domain name through Network Solutions. Our email service is hosted by Google Apps. Recently (Feb. 2011) we've been having customers report that they aren't getting our emails. Upon further investigation it seems that the failed emails are all to a common (well known) domain. We have not received any bounce messages for the emails. We've also contacted a few of the intended recipients, who have reported that the messages are not in their spam box; they simply did not receive anything. In these cases we re-sent the same email to an alternate address on another domain, which was successful received. One customer contacted their email provider about the issue. The provider recommended that we submit a form to be white-listed by their domain. Here's where my problem begins. I feel like this is heading down a slippery slope. Doesn't this undermine the very principle of email? If this is the appropriate action to take in these situations where will it end? In theory (following this model) it could be argued that eventually one will first need to "whitelist" (or more appropriately termed "authenticate") themselves with an email host before actually sending any messages. More to this point, what keeps the "bad" spammers from doing the same thing...? We've just gone full circle. I know avoiding anti-spam measures is a big cat-and-mouse game, but I think this is the wrong way of "patching" the problem. Email standards say that messages should not just disappear silently. I have a problem supporting a model that says "you must do < this to make sure your emails aren't ignored". I have a notion to call the provider and voice my complaint, although I have a feeling it will probably fall on deaf ears. Am I missing something here? Is this an acceptable approach to email spam problems? What should I do?

  Read the article

• Does NetworkSolutions have a good DNS service?

  - by joxl

  I'm recovering from a DNS disaster and I need some good advice on an alternate solution. My company owns a domain name through NetworkSolutions. Our website is hosted by another company who also maintains our DNS records. Our email is hosted by Google Apps, and the MX records are maintained through the afore-mentioned website/DNS host. Yesterday our website/DNS host had a serious hiccup in some software and completely overwrote all of our DNS records with invalid values; successfully pointing our domain and MX records at the wrong servers. Unfortunately it wasn't caught until it had time to significantly propagate. On top of that, it wasn't fixed until several hours later, combine that with a long TTL on the records; we have customers who are still bouncing emails. Anyhow, I am now completely terrified of this company's ability to do a good job, so I am considering switching to NetworkSolutions for our DNS service. I need the ability to configure A, CNAME, MX, and TXT records, preferably with a nice user interface (our current provider has a poor UI and doesn't support TXT records). Is NetworkSolutions a recommended DNS host? I am a little biased in their direction because the service will be free since we already pay them for our domain name. However I'm curious what others have experienced with their service.

  Read the article

1