cluberti

I am an SMOD at MSFN, but came over here when N1K put up this board to hang out and help when I can. I like the differences between this site, MSFN, and Tarun's Lunarsoft.net , and keeps things interesting.

Everyone should run what they're comfortable with, but I personally prefer Vista (and have adequate hardware and good driver support underneath to power it, which does change the whole experience IMHO). I prefer the eye candy, I prefer instant search in the shell and in Outlook integrated, and I like some of the other features (x64 makes a great MCE box).

Unfortunately, your findings are pretty much spot-on for most DHCP servers. Most DHCP servers nowadays can do secured IP address assignment to protect against spoofing, but no way to keep a client from getting an address if they can successfully broadcast UDP DISCOVER packets on your network. You could use MAC filtering, perhaps, or (if your DHCP server is ISC BIND on a *nix box) install something like NetReg on that box (along with ISC BIND DNS) to allow authentication before DHCP, but note that this is a bit of a hack and requires regular maintenance to keep it "clean" and functioning properly. Otherwise, there's no real way to lock down the DHCP server at the server itself, and you'll have to consider 802.1x and certificates or RADIUS. If you use 802.1x, machines will only be able to send EAPOL packets to the IAS or RADIUS server served on that segment, and won't be able to do anything else until successfully authenticated (like get a DHCP lease).

30-something... Charlotte, NC Debug specialist for an IT company

From the XP Home EULA: And from XP Pro:

The architecture of the chips, and the length of the pipeline (and the amount of cache) means that the newer chips can do more operations per clock cycle than their previous brethren - meaning a 2.2GHz 64bit chip from AMD or Intel will be "faster" than, say, a 3.2GHz P4 or a similarly clocked AMD K7 chip. That is correct, a dual-core chip has 2 actual CPU dies on one PCB, and both cores share the same L2 cache. Note that two of the major differences between 64bit CPUs and 32bit CPUs is the fact that 64bit CPUs have double the registers as a 32bit chip (they can only be used by 64bit software, however), making them much faster and capable of doing more when running a 64bit OS and software. Also, a 64bit OS running on a 64bit CPU can access far more memory than a 32bit OS running on a 32bit or 64bit CPU - 32bit CPUs can access at most 32GB of RAM (64GB with some expensive hardware trickery) and are limited to 2 or 3GB of virtual address space for applications (unless they support trickery, like AWE/PAE) and 2GB or 1GB for kernel address space, as well as having additional kernel pool memory constraints in Windows (256MB of kernel nonpaged pool, ~530MB kernel paged pool for 32bit, 48MB maximum session view size). 64bit CPUs can access up to 16 EXAbytes of RAM (theoretically - Windows limits you to a max of 8TB right now), as well as having 128GB of nonpaged and paged pool available, and 8TB of virtual address space for both usermode and kernel applications, natively. There's more to it than that, but those are the major points most people would be concerned about.

Actually, it's against the XP EULA whether or not you have a Windows Server license, so it's not legal in any way. Just a heads-up.

/me feels the love - thanks guys.

Just popping in to see if I can help here. Hello everyone!

Are you trying to audit one folder on all machines, or one folder on one machine? I'm also assuming you followed this already.