Scripting. Powershell, VMware, Windows, Active Directory & Exchange. All that kind of stuff…..
RSS icon Email icon Home icon
  • Tivoli Monitoring, WMI and Server Buffers Full

    Posted on August 26th, 2010 Jonathan Medd No comments

    If you run Tivoli Monitoring 6.2 to monitor Windows Server systems and use other applications to query WMI, e.g. PowerShell and Get-WmiObject, then you may receive the error ‘Server buffers are full and data cannot be accepted’.

    Restarting the WMI service will temporaily clear it, but the issue is liable to come back again. This can occur because of a file handle leak in the ITM Windows OS agent when collecting “Processor Information” attribute group.

    There is a fix for this issue available from the below website.

    http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=2292&context=SSRM2J&dc=DB550&uid=swg1IZ51505&loc=en_US&cs=UTF-8&lang=en&rss=ct2292tivoli

  • Windows 2003 Password Policy – Complexity Requirements Message

    Posted on February 2nd, 2009 Jonathan Medd No comments

    Doing a lot of investigation into password policies available in Windows Server 2003 and 2008 at the minute, plus some of the third-party solutions available around this area.

    One of the reasons I’ve never myself recommend using the ‘Complexity On’ feature in Windows Server is the sheer difficulty in trying to explain to users that you need to use characters from at least three of the following four groups:

    • Uppercase
    • Lowercase
    • Digits
    • Special Characters

    They typically switch off as soon as you get to the …at least three…. part of the above sentence and to be honest I don’t really blame them.

    Even if you do head down this solution (good luck to you!) the message a user gets back when they fail to change their password successfully is fairly generic and does not even mention the fact that complexity is in use.

    However, today I was made aware of a hotfix for Windows 2003 (and associated clients) where the user will now see mention of complexity requirements in the message they receive back. Since I’ve never heard or seen anyone else using this before I thought it was worth mentioning since it might make your deployment a bit smoother.

    I’ve yet to test this out myself, but I guess you gotta trust the KB article ;-)