Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration
-
But if Microsoft states this is against TOS, is there any point?
-
@dashrender it's faster to install core because the entire objective of the guide was an SMB server, not a hyper-v server.
Licensing isn't the issue either as they state this is for testing purposes, and that it is, in fact, against TOS. So use the 180 day free trial for testing purposes and spin up a VM of server core for your SMB server.
The whole hyper-v thing makes zero sense whatsoever.
-
@bnrstnr said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender it's faster to install core because the entire objective of the guide was an SMB server, not a hyper-v server.
Licensing isn't the issue either as they state this is for testing purposes, and that it is, in fact, against TOS. So use the 180 day free trial for testing purposes and spin up a VM of server core for your SMB server.
The whole hyper-v thing makes zero sense whatsoever.
Very true. Starwind isn't a company known for this sort of pointless exercise.
-
@travisdh1 said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@bnrstnr said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender it's faster to install core because the entire objective of the guide was an SMB server, not a hyper-v server.
Licensing isn't the issue either as they state this is for testing purposes, and that it is, in fact, against TOS. So use the 180 day free trial for testing purposes and spin up a VM of server core for your SMB server.
The whole hyper-v thing makes zero sense whatsoever.
Very true. Starwind isn't a company known for this sort of pointless exercise.
What do you mean by that?
I absolutely disagree on anything like "We should not talk about that". In IT industry it's called "security thru the obscurity". Banning meth or nitroglycerine cooking books won't stop people from producing them. Real exercise is evangelization and telling something "Yes, you can do that but it's a bad idea and here's why" rather then telling nothing and just waiting for somebody to try. IMHO of course.
P.S. #$%# I'm thinking about just taking the whole thing down :((((((((((
-
@kooler I don't think there is any need to take it down, It is a good read and interesting Idea, for obvious reasons it just wouldn't be practical In a production environment, I think that's what everyone is meaning. Thank you for taking the time in posting the article.
-
I agree - it's already written, and knowledge is good for it's own sake.
But, I do wonder - what was the purpose in writing it?
Using your meth example, if you're evangelizing against meth, you definitely don't make a book explaining how to make it. So with that in mind, it's not bad that the explanation/write-up exists, it just seems odd to come from a source like StarWinds.
The use of this in production would require a tied license, but one of the main goals of Hyper-V Server is a lack of license requirement. Even in a lab setup, is this the way you'd really want someone to set it up? I lean for the side of No, if for no other reason than to give some person the crazy idea that this would be OK in production because they saw it in a lab (cause ya know that never happens
) -
@kooler said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@travisdh1 said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@bnrstnr said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender it's faster to install core because the entire objective of the guide was an SMB server, not a hyper-v server.
Licensing isn't the issue either as they state this is for testing purposes, and that it is, in fact, against TOS. So use the 180 day free trial for testing purposes and spin up a VM of server core for your SMB server.
The whole hyper-v thing makes zero sense whatsoever.
Very true. Starwind isn't a company known for this sort of pointless exercise.
What do you mean by that?
I absolutely disagree on anything like "We should not talk about that". In IT industry it's called "security thru the obscurity". Banning meth or nitroglycerine cooking books won't stop people from producing them. Real exercise is evangelization and telling something "Yes, you can do that but it's a bad idea and here's why" rather then telling nothing and just waiting for somebody to try. IMHO of course.
P.S. #$%# I'm thinking about just taking the whole thing down :((((((((((
You have the warning there. If someone wants to do it in production and gets slapped my MS, it's on them. You shouldn't even need the warning there because it's not your responsibility to make sure people use Microsoft licenses appropriately.
Keep it up.
-
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
Using your meth example, if you're evangelizing against meth, you definitely don't make a book explaining how to make it.
I don't agree with this premise. I make guides on things I wouldn't do all the time. There isn't an association like you are feeling between promoting one practice and documenting another. I think you are falsely seeing documentation as evangelization which is totally untrue. If that's what you are sensing, then that is the same trick that marketers use to make you think that they said something when they didn't actually say it. This article is purely information, it doesn't suggest that you use it in any specific way. That would be reading into it.
-
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
I lean for the side of No, if for no other reason than to give some person the crazy idea that this would be OK in production because they saw it in a lab (cause ya know that never happens
)I don't think "gives crazy people ideas" is good logic for avoiding things. We can apply that to anything to make us not do it. Crazy people will do crazy things with or without us. And they read into things things that are not there randomly, so while we might project that they will read into this thing in this way, they also might do the opposite. They might read anything into anything. So basing decisions around that is a pointless venture.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
Using your meth example, if you're evangelizing against meth, you definitely don't make a book explaining how to make it.
I don't agree with this premise. I make guides on things I wouldn't do all the time. There isn't an association like you are feeling between promoting one practice and documenting another. I think you are falsely seeing documentation as evangelization which is totally untrue. If that's what you are sensing, then that is the same trick that marketers use to make you think that they said something when they didn't actually say it. This article is purely information, it doesn't suggest that you use it in any specific way. That would be reading into it.
I guess I am saying that. You are a person. You can publish things, and there's less issue if, you Scott, are for or against this, versus a company like StarWinds.
-
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
I guess I am saying that. You are a person. You can publish things, and there's less issue if, you Scott, are for or against this, versus a company like StarWinds.
Is that true? What does me personally publishing something make different from a company doing it? And if publishing it means zero about recommending it (neither for nor against) and a company is twice as much as zero, that's still zero. It's not a recommendation in any way. So whether they are me, you, Microsoft themselves - doesn't change that it isn't a recommendation.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
I guess I am saying that. You are a person. You can publish things, and there's less issue if, you Scott, are for or against this, versus a company like StarWinds.
Is that true? What does me personally publishing something make different from a company doing it? And if publishing it means zero about recommending it (neither for nor against) and a company is twice as much as zero, that's still zero. It's not a recommendation in any way. So whether they are me, you, Microsoft themselves - doesn't change that it isn't a recommendation.
What was the point of documenting it in the first place? Weather it's being recommended or not.
I think we all know it's possible to setup most any service on Hyper-V if you want to, doesn't mean documenting such is anything other than a waste of time.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
I guess I am saying that. You are a person. You can publish things, and there's less issue if, you Scott, are for or against this, versus a company like StarWinds.
Is that true? What does me personally publishing something make different from a company doing it? And if publishing it means zero about recommending it (neither for nor against) and a company is twice as much as zero, that's still zero. It's not a recommendation in any way. So whether they are me, you, Microsoft themselves - doesn't change that it isn't a recommendation.
I don't agree that a company publishing something like this is the same as a person. A person will often do weird and crazy things - but a company shouldn't, especially one that wants itself taken seriously.
Posting something like this is a defacto OK with the process, wither you want it to be or not. Some guy/gal will find this and point to out to their boss - hey look, I found the instructions on ABC website, so it must be OK. The good thing, at least in this case, they specifically say not for production. -
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
Posting something like this is a defacto OK with the process, wither you want it to be or not.
This is totally untrue. This is something you've added to the documentation. Publishing info on something in no way means this. Whether you want it to or not, that's not something that telling someone how to do something works, ever.
-
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
Some guy/gal will find this and point to out to their boss - hey look, I found the instructions on ABC website, so it must be OK.
And that person would be completely wrong and would have zero excuses if they did something wrong based on that made up logic. You are connecting "reckless idiot at company's actions" with what defines recommendations at a company. It doesn't work that way. Just because someone will do something stupid or inappropriate and just because they might blame someone innocent has no bearing on what we are discussing. That's not how things work. That's like blaming the documentation on how to use a parking break with people doing doughnuts. The driver is at fault, regardless of the fact that the car maker documented how the brake works.
-
@kooler said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@travisdh1 said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@bnrstnr said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender it's faster to install core because the entire objective of the guide was an SMB server, not a hyper-v server.
Licensing isn't the issue either as they state this is for testing purposes, and that it is, in fact, against TOS. So use the 180 day free trial for testing purposes and spin up a VM of server core for your SMB server.
The whole hyper-v thing makes zero sense whatsoever.
Very true. Starwind isn't a company known for this sort of pointless exercise.
What do you mean by that?
I absolutely disagree on anything like "We should not talk about that". In IT industry it's called "security thru the obscurity". Banning meth or nitroglycerine cooking books won't stop people from producing them. Real exercise is evangelization and telling something "Yes, you can do that but it's a bad idea and here's why" rather then telling nothing and just waiting for somebody to try. IMHO of course.
P.S. #$%# I'm thinking about just taking the whole thing down :((((((((((
Hey dont remove it. It is well explained that the solution is against eula. Mine was just a mild note about the dissemination.
I've clicked on the link hoping in a change of the eula or so, because you are always more informed than me! Instead it is "just" to show that all pieces are there for a free file server. It is just a legal thing which limits your freedom.
Maybe just rework the intro of the blog post to point out this aspect. It will make more clear your goal.
IMHO.
-
@matteo-nunziati I agree.
Like I mentioned before, just seems a waste of time to me. That's all.
-
@travisdh1 said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@matteo-nunziati I agree.
Like I mentioned before, just seems a waste of time to me. That's all.
Marketing if nothing else. Even if it had no technical purpose, it sure got people talking.
-
Also, in the followup post on the blog they actually do another interesting lab that requires this first bit.
