Building a server for all your needs.

A

a_skeleton_03

<Banned>
29,948
29,762
brekk said:
Diving into advanced file systems on Linux! I just bought a second barebones DL380 G7 off ebay for $60 shipped. Got a pair of Xeon L5630's for $4 each, and an LSI SAS9207-BE for 25$. Going to move my MSA60 over to this system and run Linux with probably BTRFS to use as a NAS.

Current DL380 will be VM host.


I was looking at Rockstor for pre-made Linux OS with BTRFS solution, but I'd like to use the availability to use the system for more then solely a NAS. Need to look into how I can incorporate a BTRFS file share with a full fledged linux distro that I can mess with in other ways, maybe ProxMox. Not sure about virtualizing the file share system.
Click to expand...
Look into one of the NAS operating systems like FreeNAS.
 
brekk

brekk

Dancing Dino Superstar
<Bronze Donator>
2,191
1,746
I'm trying to stay away from ZFS and it's rigid nature. I have access to a ton of mish-mosh drives and want to use something like BTRFS that more flexible in adding and removing drives. Hence looking at Rockstor over FreeNAS.
 
Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,370
22,143
I want to build a quiet, compact 'server' not in a server form-factor, really just the smallest, quietest headless Threadripper box possible, when the new Threadrippers come out. Any ideas for a chassis?

EDIT: Fuck, not even sure I want to run it completely headless. That makes this even more complicated, might need integrated graphics. Maybe it'll have to be a 9900K on mini ITX.
 
A

a_skeleton_03

<Banned>
29,948
29,762
Mist said:
I want to build a quiet, compact 'server' not in a server form-factor, really just the smallest, quietest headless Threadripper box possible, when the new Threadrippers come out. Any ideas for a chassis?

EDIT: Fuck, not even sure I want to run it completely headless. That makes this even more complicated, might need integrated graphics. Maybe it'll have to be a 9900K on mini ITX.
Click to expand...
I know nothing about threadripper but when you say small and compact I think Intel NUC which is fairly powerful and close to silent.
 
Neranja

Neranja

<Bronze Donator>
2,605
4,143
Mist said:
just the smallest, quietest headless Threadripper box possible
Click to expand...
That won't work well. The current Threadripper has a TDP of 180W, and rumor has it that the next generation ups the TDP to 250W. For a single socket that is nowhere near quiet nor small.

What would you do with all that CPU horsepower in a small and compact server anyway?
 
3301

3301

Wake Up Man
<Banned>
2,770
1,379
Mist said:
I want to build a quiet, compact 'server' not in a server form-factor, really just the smallest, quietest headless Threadripper box possible, when the new Threadrippers come out. Any ideas for a chassis?

EDIT: Fuck, not even sure I want to run it completely headless. That makes this even more complicated, might need integrated graphics. Maybe it'll have to be a 9900K on mini ITX.
Click to expand...

Supermicro | Products | SuperServers | Mini-ITX | 5028D-TN4T. 8 Xeon D cores, ~$1200, add your own ram and drives.
 
Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,370
22,143
a_skeleton_03 said:
I know nothing about threadripper but when you say small and compact I think Intel NUC which is fairly powerful and close to silent.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was actually thinking of one of the Hades Canyon NUCs and I might still just do that.
 
Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,370
22,143
Neranja said:
That won't work well. The current Threadripper has a TDP of 180W, and rumor has it that the next generation ups the TDP to 250W. For a single socket that is nowhere near quiet nor small.

What would you do with all that CPU horsepower in a small and compact server anyway?
Click to expand...
Home Lab running a DC, a Skype for Business Server, an Exchange server and database server, Avaya Aura Communication Manager, Avaya Aura System/Session Manager, Avaya Session Border Controller for Enterprise, Avaya IP Office Server edition and probably a virtual Fortinet but maybe I'll get one out of the trash instead.

You know, stuff.
 
A

a_skeleton_03

<Banned>
29,948
29,762
Mist said:
Home Lab running a DC, a Skype for Business Server, an Exchange server and database server, Avaya Aura Communication Manager, Avaya Aura System/Session Manager, Avaya Session Border Controller for Enterprise, Avaya IP Office Server edition and probably a virtual Fortinet but maybe I'll get one out of the trash instead.

You know, stuff.
Click to expand...
Why don't you run like a 2U rack server in a closet?

I love the R720 as a platform.

LabGopher :: Great server deals on eBay
 
dizzie

dizzie

Triggered Happy
2,509
3,937
Mist said:
I want to build a quiet, compact 'server' not in a server form-factor, really just the smallest, quietest headless Threadripper box possible, when the new Threadrippers come out. Any ideas for a chassis?

EDIT: Fuck, not even sure I want to run it completely headless. That makes this even more complicated, might need integrated graphics. Maybe it'll have to be a 9900K on mini ITX.
Click to expand...

Did a mini ITX build for a friend in this case - PC – Q25 – LIAN LI

5 hot swap drive bays, can fit quite a double bay GPU. Was a bastard finding a psu to fit but managed to find a 500 watt cooler master modular in the end. Need a bit of planning if you're thinking of packing it with kit.

Lovely case, well built and it's very small. You can carry it under your arm. Looks great too, just plain no stupid flashing lights and stuff.
 
Frenzied Wombat

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
Mist said:
Home Lab running a DC, a Skype for Business Server, an Exchange server and database server, Avaya Aura Communication Manager, Avaya Aura System/Session Manager, Avaya Session Border Controller for Enterprise, Avaya IP Office Server edition and probably a virtual Fortinet but maybe I'll get one out of the trash instead.

You know, stuff.
Click to expand...

Triggered.

I fucking hate Avaya with a god damned fucking passion. If it isn't their fucking broken license entitlement website, it's their dogshit tier technical support. We've had a ticket open with them for almost two months trying to track down the reason for intermittent one way audio on their B179 conference phones. They were shit before, but they've gone extra shit since their bankruptcy.
 
Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,370
22,143
Frenzied Wombat said:
Triggered.

I fucking hate Avaya with a god damned fucking passion. If it isn't their fucking broken license entitlement website, it's their dogshit tier technical support. We've had a ticket open with them for almost two months trying to track down the reason for intermittent one way audio on their B179 conference phones. They were shit before, but they've gone extra shit since their bankruptcy.
Click to expand...
Do you have traceSM captures from the session manager the SIP station is registered to? The word 'intermittent' here makes me squeamish.

Are all the affected conference phones on the same subnet, or scattered? Is it one-way audio on station-to-station calls internal to the PBX or are provider trunks involved?
 
Frenzied Wombat

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
Mist said:
Do you have traceSM captures from the session manager the SIP station is registered to? The word 'intermittent' here makes me squeamish.

Are all the affected conference phones on the same subnet, or scattered? Is it one-way audio on station-to-station calls internal to the PBX or are provider trunks involved?
Click to expand...

Tbh I'm not the Avaya guru, I'm the guy bashing my Avaya guy to get it fixed and browbeating our Avaya rep over their craptastic support.

I know we have wireshark captures from the core switch so we can see all traffic, and specifically traffic between the B179 and the SBC. What we are seeing is that some calls between the B179 and SBC only have packets going one way, while others are bidirectional. All the B179's are on the same subnet, and this problem only occurs with the conference phones, not desktop phones (and desktop phones are in same subnet as conference phones). All affected calls are outbound over provider trunks. What's doubly weird is the one way audio clears up after a minute or so-- if you stay on the call it eventually sorts itself out. Also, we have a SIP gateway but the phones are h323 I believe.
 
Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,370
22,143
Frenzied Wombat said:
Tbh I'm not the Avaya guru, I'm the guy bashing my Avaya guy to get it fixed and browbeating our Avaya rep over their craptastic support.

I know we have wireshark captures from the core switch so we can see all traffic, and specifically traffic between the B179 and the SBC. What we are seeing is that some calls between the B179 and SBC only have packets going one way, while others are bidirectional. All the B179's are on the same subnet, and this problem only occurs with the conference phones, not desktop phones (and desktop phones are in same subnet as conference phones). All affected calls are outbound over provider trunks. What's doubly weird is the one way audio clears up after a minute or so-- if you stay on the call it eventually sorts itself out. Also, we have a SIP gateway but the phones are h323 I believe.
Click to expand...
B179 are definitely SIP stations. I'd need to know what device they register to, a session manager or directly to the SBC/sip gateway (which would be weird and bad) and the full talk path out to the provider. Codec would help too.
 
A

a_skeleton_03

<Banned>
29,948
29,762
Mist said:
I don't want a rack server because the tiny fans drive me crazy. I want something I can put relatively large, slow fans in. I will probably just built an mATX server with a handle on top. I want something I can tote around with me.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's a way to do it just was curious why.
 
Frenzied Wombat

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
Mist said:
B179 are definitely SIP stations. I'd need to know what device they register to, a session manager or directly to the SBC/sip gateway (which would be weird and bad) and the full talk path out to the provider. Codec would help too.
Click to expand...

We've gotten closer to figuring this stupid problem out. Basically, looking at wiresharks, we are not seeing SIP 180 or 183 messages on calls that have the one way audio issue, while we do see them on successful calls.

Opened a ticket with our carrier (Level 3) and they see that they are only sending them on some calls, but they claim that it is out of their control, can't guarantee that they are always sent, and that it's not a requirement to send them as per the RFC.

It's at "development" with Avaya and they haven't told us crap besides that they are investigating, but obviously the device is not capable of handling calls unless it sees 180/183.
 
Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,370
22,143
Frenzied Wombat said:
We've gotten closer to figuring this stupid problem out. Basically, looking at wiresharks, we are not seeing SIP 180 or 183 messages on calls that have the one way audio issue, while we do see them on successful calls.

Opened a ticket with our carrier (Level 3) and they see that they are only sending them on some calls, but they claim that it is out of their control, can't guarantee that they are always sent, and that it's not a requirement to send them as per the RFC.

It's at "development" with Avaya and they haven't told us crap besides that they are investigating, but obviously the device is not capable of handling calls unless it sees 180/183.
Click to expand...
What type of SBC?

An SBC is a back-to-back user agent, which means the call effectively terminates on the PSTN side and is re-originated by the SBC on the interior side. So even if the PSTN is sending bad messages, the call on the other side of the SBC should be able to be modified to act appropriately.
 
Frenzied Wombat

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
Mist said:
What type of SBC?

An SBC is a back-to-back user agent, which means the call effectively terminates on the PSTN side and is re-originated by the SBC on the interior side. So even if the PSTN is sending bad messages, the call on the other side of the SBC should be able to be modified to act appropriately.
Click to expand...

SBC is on the carrier side, we don't have one. However the carrier claims the 180/183 messages don't come from the SBC, but once it's passed through the tandem switch to say, Verizon or AT&T. However, they say what is supposed to happen is in the absence of 180/183 progress messages, when the switch sees the 200 message, it is supposed to set up two way audio anyways. Carrier says you can't artificially inject 180/183 messages at the SBC. Basically they are saying there is no RFC obligation to present 180/183, and it's an avaya bug where it is ignoring 200 progress messages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.