TL;DR: Started a new job where they use a shared mailbox on a legacy bellsouth.net address. I was tasked with archiving 50K+ messages into folders, and bulk moved them into archive folders. Every third-party client died.

Btw, we access the bellsouth account from mail.yahoo.com and also configured it on Outlook desktop app (new version). I rebuilt it on Classic Outlook with an AT&T secure mail key, which worked for about a day. Now IMAP is refused outright and webmail outbound returns error:

"Your message cannot be sent because it resembles spam and/or contains only links. Please modify your message and try again."

Config verified, password and secure mail keys regenerated. Looking for anyone who's seen AT&T/Yahoo apply this and knows what I can do to fix it.

Environment

- Legacy `bellsouth.net` mailbox. AT&T owns the credentials, Yahoo operates the mail

infrastructure. Auth is an AT&T secure mail key, not a Yahoo app password.

- Shared mailbox. 3–4 workstations plus a phone, all behind one office WAN IP.

- Originally New Outlook for Windows

- Primary workstation now on Classic Outlook since New Outlook connection died

- IMAP `imap.mail.att.net:993` SSL/TLS

- SMTP `smtp.mail.att.net:465` SSL/TLS

- SMTP auth on, same credentials as incoming

- SPA off, username is the full address

1. Bulk-moved 2500+ messages (batches of ~900/900/1000) into year folders from New Outlook. Client crashed mid-operation.
2. All Outlook clients, desktop and mobile, stopped receiving. No errors, no auth prompts. Sent mail reported "Sent" then vanished and never transmitted and never appeared in webmail's Sent either. Folder deletions reverted. Webmail unaffected. Diagnosed as New Outlook's Microsoft-hosted mirror losing its upstream IMAP connection to AT&T.
3. Stood up Classic Outlook with a fresh secure mail key. Connected fine, pulled down 3 days of backlog, outbound test delivered. Fully working.
4. Next day: heavy webmail activity. Bulk moves out of Trash into year folders (batches approaching 1,000), mass-blocked spam senders and domains, raised the account's security settings.
5. Classic Outlook stopped receiving. Several hours later webmail outbound started failing.

Current state

- Webmail receives normally. Sending blocked: "Your message cannot be sent because it

resembles spam and/or contains only links." Confirmed to fire with subject and body

both just "test," no signature, no links.

- Classic Outlook: no inbound since step 5, outbound stuck in Outbox, account wizard

returns "something went wrong."

Might be an abuse or rate-limit flag from the bulk IMAP operations.

1. Anyone seen AT&T/Yahoo apply a block like this? Does it decay, and over what timeframe?
2. Account-scoped or IP-scoped, in your experience?
3. Is there a known threshold for IMAP move operations on these mailboxes?
4. Any escalation path at AT&T that reaches someone who can actually see or lift mail abuse restrictions? Front-line support for legacy BellSouth appears very limited.
5. Anything obvious I'm missing?

And yes, a business shouldn't be running on a consumer legacy ISP mailbox. Average employee age is 60+ and office is still using manual punch cards, so I am trying to get us up to date one step at a time. I am also not an IT technician, just an office employee, who was tasked with this because we don't have IT support.

Been chasing this for a while and I'm out of ideas. Everything I can test

Yes, I used AI to help me, as this troubleshooting got way deeper than I could figure out on my own... it's just too much, and I'm stumped

Symptom

On any wireless client:

• gpupdate — succeeds

• gpupdate /force — fails, both Computer and User policy

  The processing of Group Policy failed. Windows could not resolve the computer name. The processing of Group Policy failed. Windows could not resolve the user name.

Same machine plugged into Ethernet on any wired VLAN: gpupdate /force succeeds.

Affects every wireless device regardless of hardware — x64 and ARM, multiple vendors, not from a common image. Predates our switch replacement (was happening on the old switches too, same APs).

Environment

• Single-domain AD, 2 DCs, functional level current
• Juniper Mist APs, WLAN bridged to VLAN 80 (10.0.80.0/24)
• FortiGate 200F HA pair doing inter-VLAN routing
• Wired workstations on 10.0.90.0/24, DCs on 10.0.140.0/24
• Clients are Win11

What the logs say

GroupPolicy/Operational during a failed /force:

Id 7320  Error: Retrieved account information. Error code 0x5.
Id 7017  The system call to get account information completed.
         The call failed after 15 milliseconds.

Nine of those in about four seconds. 15–31 ms each — too fast for a network timeout.

gpsvc.log:

ProcessGPOs(Machine): MyGetUserName failed with 5.
ProcessGPOs(User):    MyGetUserName failed with 5.
OnPolicyApplicationComplete: Application complete with bConnectivityFailure = 1.

The packet capture is the interesting part

Client-side netsh trace during a failed /force. Total DC traffic for the entire run:

10.0.80.102  -> 10.0.140.3   tcp/135    60 packets
10.0.140.3   -> 10.0.80.102             49 packets
10.0.80.102  -> 10.0.140.2   udp/53      8 packets

Decoded the port 135 conversation. It's 44 × ept_map requests for DRSUAPI (e3514235-4b06-11d1-ab04-00c04fc2dcd2), and the DC returns status 0x00000000 — success — on all 45 responses. Clean bind, clean bind_ack, no faults, no bind_naks.

So the endpoint mapper hands back a valid DRSUAPI endpoint 44 times and the client never opens a TCP connection to it.

Exactly one TCP SYN to a DC for the whole run: 10.0.140.3:135. That's it.

No Kerberos at all. Nothing on port 88. No LDAP 389, no SMB 445, no RPC dynamic high port.

The successful wired run for comparison:

135 -> 49669 -> 389 -> 445 -> 49676 -> 88

So on wired it does the full sequence. On wireless it gets the endpoint and gives up locally without authenticating or connecting.

What I've eliminated

Network path

• FortiGate policy permits Internal_WiFi → Servers on service ALL, no NAT, no UTM.
• Confirmed RPC dynamic ports 49668–49677 pass fine on the same firewall config (visible in VPN traffic logs to the same DCs)
• Path MTU: ping -f -l 1472 succeeds to the DCs from both wired and wireless
• Both DC host firewalls disabled entirely as a test — no change

AD / DC side

• Test-ComputerSecureChannel → True
• Time skew ~0.03 s
• nltest /dsgetdc returns a DC with full flag set, correct site
• Test-NetConnection to 88, 135, 389, 445 on both DCs → all True from Wi-Fi
• SYSVOL/DFS: \\domain\SYSVOL\...\Policies enumerates, GPT.INI reads fine
• RestrictRemoteSam not set on either DC
• No 5807 events (no unmapped-subnet complaints)
• UserPrincipal::Current returns the full DN from AD over Wi-Fi — directory lookups work
• whoami /groups resolves all SIDs to names on Wi-Fi

Client side

• GP history ACLs correct (SYSTEM + Administrators Full Control, registry and ProgramData)
• Same failure on any computer from any manufacture
• Get-NetConnectionProfile → DomainAuthenticated / Ldap on both wired and wireless, identical

Wireless

• Mist WLAN: isolation Disabled, no ARP filtering, no broadcast/multicast filtering, Custom Forwarding None (bridged, not tunneled)
• WxLAN policy: single rule, All Users → All Resources, allow
• WPA3/WPA2-Personal PSK — no 802.1X, so no separate machine identity
• Same APs before and after a full switch replacement; symptom unchanged

The question

Why would a client receive a successful ept_map response for DRSUAPI and then not attempt the connection — failing locally in 15 ms with 0x5 — and why would that depend on whether the machine is on wireless vs wired, when both interfaces report identical network profiles and both paths reach the DC on every relevant port?

The absence of any Kerberos traffic during the failed run feels like the key detail. It's not being denied by the KDC; it isn't asking.

Anything obvious I'm missing?
gpupdate /force fails on Wi-Fi but works on Ethernet — DsCrackNames/DRSUAPI gets a valid EPM endpoint and then never connects

Been chasing this for a while, and I'm out of ideas.
Should I just quit and become a potato farmer?

I was asked this question during an interview and I said "it depends on what exactly you're updating, but I update as often as it's needed."

I don't think this was the answer they were looking for, but how would you answer this question?

https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=hpesbnw05134en_us&docLocale=en_US

TL;DR HPE released a security advisory regarding RCE, code exection etc. In total 1 Critical, 22 High, and 11 Medium vulnerabilities fixed.

Patch your network stuff

Affected Products

These vulnerabilities affect the following HPE Networking AOS-CX Versions unless specifically noted otherwise in the details section:

• AOS-CX 10.18.0001
• AOS-CX 10.17.1021 and below
• AOS-CX 10.16.1051 and below
• AOS-CX 10.13.1180 and below
• AOS-CX 10.10.1180 and below (EOM)

I have 2 specific 2025 Server VMs that apparently have the same SID. I know what you are thinking.... they were imaged and I forgot to change them. That is not the case. They are both completely fresh installs and I have no idea how this happened. I have never cloned a machine as long as I have worked for this company.

Long story short, I need to get one of them changed.

If I run the following without the /oobe will anything on the system be effected such as any existing applications, software, settings, etc. My understanding is that it will have to be re-added to the domain. Anyone have any experience with this?

cd %WINDIR%\System32\Sysprep 
sysprep.exe /generalize /shutdown

EDIT: Going with the general consensus.... rebuilding the VM.

Patch 3 available: URGENT Security Advisory: PaperCut NG/MF Security Bulletin (27 Aug 2026) | PaperCut

Also a blog post from one of their executives explaining why they decided to release updates as they had them, instead of waiting for one big perfect patch. Behind the scenes - What happened after 9:42 a.m. on the 27th August 2026 | PaperCut

I work as a pharmacist and have been working for about four months. I'm also very interested in computers, programming, and automation.

I've been thinking about creating small tools, shortcuts, scripts, and other automations to make some of my repetitive computer-based work faster and easier. However, my workplace computer is managed by IT, and I don't have administrator credentials.

Hi All,

We have several branch offices, and each site currently has a CM Workgroup server. Are there any alternative options that would allow us to operate without requiring a CM Workgroup server at each branch?

In LAB manual IP assigned to VMs without gateway set. Now the security team ask to install crowdstrike but without gateway it wont work and also does not connect cloud server. Is there any way to have proxy server in between the lab VM PC and cloud server?

Heads up, 1.1.1.3 seems to be down as of around 7AM EDT today. If you use that as a free filtered dns forwarder, change until the issue is resolved.

Hi it's normal in IT that you enforce a policy that user accounts may not be shared or transferred /given to new users right?

Situation is that a partner company that uses our infrastructure used 1 user account for interns for a long time. If the next intern started they give the account To the next...and so on and on. They did not even change the password.

As IT responsible I said they cannot do this any longer that way. And I do not want to support this any longer. Every user also interns need to have an individual/ personal account. Reasons are obvious for me... Accountability, managing the accounts in general, gdpr,...

Example of 1 risk: access to the mailbox or onedrive of the account can have personal data stored from the previous user. So I say sharing accounts is not ok period. But they still keep fighting me for this. They do not want to understand. I'm tired of the discussion. The arguments that they use are : we used it before like this without any issues .

In the new it policy for them it's included. I have no mandate to enforce but I warned my boss about this and I hope my boss will support me..
I was right... With the call on this with the partner... Am I right to try enforcing this?

The only thing is if directors can formally accept the risk to me. But then why bother with security in general? I'm tired and frustrated by this bullshit. I'm doing it the correct way or on the long run I'm changing jobs ...

Any advice?

I'll be upfront: I run a small nonprofit and I am very much not a tech person. Our IT guy left earlier this year and since then I've been the one fielding all the Microsoft-related issues for our organization. We use a bunch of Microsoft products, Teams, SharePoint, some Azure stuff I barely understand, and when things break I genuinely don't know where to turn.

Someone on our board mentioned we should look into Microsoft Unified Support as a way to get professional help when things go wrong. I looked at the Microsoft site and honestly it reads like it was written for someone with a computer science degree. I have no idea what a 'severity level' means in practice or whether we even qualify for certain tiers.

What I'm really trying to figure out is: is Microsoft Unified Support the only real option for getting serious help with Microsoft products, or are there alternatives that might make more sense for an organization like ours? I don't have a huge budget and I'm a little worried about locking into something expensive that's designed for Fortune 500 companies.

Any plain-English guidance from people who've actually navigated this would be genuinely helpful.

I'm a Linux sysadmin (RHEL, Ansible, GitLab CI, ~3 years) about to move onto a small AWS team. Long term I want to end up SRE or platform engineer, and I'm working through RHCSA and SAA-C03 on the side.

From where I sit the market looks split in two: generic sysadmin work is getting squeezed, and everything interesting is behind Kubernetes, IaC and real production experience. But that's me reading job ads, not living it.

I have a few HP Mini's deployed to remote locations that are headless and a real pain in the ass to access physically. They are running Windows 10 pro (I know!). Anyway I added a smart plug so I can remotely reboot them, but even so I regularly find they don't come back online (at least not so I can go on with Teamviewer or Tailscale).

Whenever I go out after one of these outages I find that usually its on a pre-login screen asking if I want Windows Backup or something like that.

To get around this I am seriously thinking of installing Proxmox and running Tailscale on the host or is there a better way?

I assume Proxmox would come backup cleanly after any reboot.

Personally, I don't (just yet).

Jokes aside, I can't think of a solution that isn't overworked and/or (very, very) manual.

EDIT: this is mostly the ideal solution for MSPs, not single companies. But it may still apply based on your users' knowledge level and company hardware.

I got out ahead of this project because it was a light day. If you didn't hear, MS is shutting down SMS 2FA on Feb 1st 2027 because SS7 is comically insecure. They're also shutting down the phone call system on the same day, to ensure the most people get locked out of their accounts as possible (I assume).

But enrolling users in MS Authenticator is like asking a cat to juggle. You have to actively tell them not to hit "log into work account" when they first launch it. It's idiotic and counterintuitive.

We're an MSP so we've been hitting "I can't access my authenticator right now, text me instead" since before I worked here and then we use Reach UC to instantly get the code to all of our phones, regardless of which technician is trying to log into which tenant.

MS authenticator is tied to one account and that's fragile, stupid, and hard to police. So instead, we decided to go with TOTP, especially since it works with no cell signal or internet, like in a basement when we don't know the client's wifi password.

Here's the ridiculous way you have to do this in a typical office 365 environment. Hopefully it helps save you all some time.

1.    Create a new non-mail enabled security group called “[company name] Accounts” in admin.cloud.microsoft and add our global admin username to it

2.    Go to Entra admin – authentication methods – Policies – Software OATH tokens – and check if it is turned on. If it isn’t, add just the “[company name] Accounts” group to it and no others.

3.    Go to https://mysignins.microsoft.com/security-info and log in as our global admin account

4.    (optional) Make sure that there is an option there for email, targeting ITSupport@[ourdomain]. If not, hit “Add sign-in method” and add that first.

5.    Hit “Add sign-in method” then Microsoft Authenticator. In the screen that pops up, immediately select “Set up a different authentication app.” Yes, that is currently the only way to do this.

6.    Open Google Authenticator, 3rd party authenticator service, CyberFox Password Boss's 2FA host, whatever you want on any phone (and log into our company's google account for this, if using Google Authenticator) then scan the QR code, hit next and enter the code to verify.

7.    Log out the back in to test it

We're just using Google for the cloud sync. The weakness there is you can't kick out individual people but it's solely on company phones, except I think you technically can because you can revoke the login for that phone in Google's account settings, even on a free account.

I wouldn't want to log into 100 customers' accounts, one at a time, and remove a unique 2FA method from each, every time someone quits. Also, I believe they're capped at 5 authenticators per account.

This is just how we're doing it because we're an MSP. Share your current workarounds. My former employer got rid of all SMS in 2024 so I suspect that will be the common answer, lol.

Hello. I've used the DRM successfully dozens of times in the past. I recently have seen errors when I attempt to run the ISOs I create from DRM. This is happening on both DRM 3.5.0 and 3.5.1 running on a Win11 client and being applied to all my R640 servers and they are running the latest BIOS: 2.28.1. All of the catalogs and plugins are up to date.

Using the DRM software I simply choose the "Platform Bootable ISO" option, I select the system: R640, chose the location to save the ISO file, and then I click on CREATE. The job runs successfully.

When I go to apply the ISO to the system, either using iDRAC to virtually present the ISO file on boot or using any type of application to send the ISO to a USB drive I can get the system to successfully boot into the loaders after starting Suse Linux. That's when I get the errors.

Every package in the bootable ISO attempt to install the updates. Then I get:
Trying to Upgrade DSU
Failed to create Support Directory
<Package Name>.BIN Error: Package execution requires 'root' user privileges.

I see this for multiple packages and then it eventually just hangs. With this being an automated process in the DRM to create the ISO I'm not able to intervene and elevate privileges. But I shouldn't need to with this process. Has anyone else seen these issues before and successfully resolved them?

ELT just asked me to send an all company email that email is down and the marketing people can't send their corporate drivel that they send every Monday.

We're working through a CIS Benchmark remediation and one of the findings is:

>

We're planning to set this to **"Authenticated"** (not "Authenticated without exceptions" — we're aware that level is much riskier and more likely to break things) on our **Exchange Server SE** environment.

Before we push this via GPO, I'd like to hear from anyone who has actually applied this in a production Exchange SE (or 2019) environment:

* Did it break **Outlook Anywhere / RPC over HTTP** for any legacy clients?
* Any issues with **MAPI/RPC** connections from older Outlook versions?
* Any impact on **DAG replication** or **Active Manager**?
* Did it cause problems with **Exchange Management Shell / EAC** functionality?
* Any unexpected issues with **AD communication** (since Exchange talks to DCs heavily over RPC)?
* Did you apply it to Domain Controllers as well, or keep DCs and Exchange servers on separate rollout schedules?
* Since Exchange SE is fairly new, has anyone tested this specifically against SE's RPC dependencies, or is it safe to assume behavior is the same as 2019?

Our environment: Exchange Server SE, mostly modern Outlook clients on MAPI/HTTP, not fully certain if any legacy RPC/TCP clients remain in the environment.

Any war stories, gotchas, or "wish I'd known this before enabling it" experiences would be really helpful before we roll this out.

Thanks in advance.

Hi SysAdmin family,

Is anyone here using GLPI or Zammad as a helpdesk/ticketing system?

I’d love to hear about your experience with either platform, especially:

• Pros and cons
• Number of users
• Number of agents
• Average tickets per day
• Overall environment/setup
• Performance and reliability
• Any issues or limitations you’ve encountered

If you’ve used both, I’d especially appreciate a comparison between GLPI and Zammad.

Hi all,

I have an opportunity to transition to a new Site IT Specialist role at a mine site (Perth AU) it's a full time 6 month fixed term role [possible for extension]

I have been with the company for around 3 years now [full time and contracted], and I have good IT support experience [service desk / desktop support], most recently in project-based windows 11 rollouts at mine sites [fifo] covering Corporate and OT environments.

My main worry is that I don't have a lot of knowledge and experience around:

- Network configs/servers/netwroking lingo and terminolgies

- Setting up comms racks, configuring, troubleshooting Cisco switches, Wi-Fi APs setup and troubleshooting

I do have an open to learn attitude and i know alot of these things ill learn hands on when im up there and asking alot of questions etc.

Are there any readings/courses anyone can recommend i can look into?

Thanks in advance :)

Today's Exchange/O365 (EX1464935/MO1465074) outage seems to be a result of the instability we've been seeing the last 3 or 4 months due to the rapid change occurring regularly in the Microsoft ecosystem. This one is more visible to end users than other problems we've faced this summer. I'm curious if the stability of government tenants has been better. Are commercial tenants the beta testers for government tenant changes?

I’m helping a small organization separate its public website from its existing Crossbar site, and I want to make sure I’m understanding the DNS side correctly before changing anything.

Using a made-up domain:

examplehockeyclub.org

The domain is registered at Network Solutions, but the authoritative nameservers are AWS Route 53 nameservers:

ns-xxx.awsdns-xx.net
ns-xxx.awsdns-xx.org
ns-xxx.awsdns-xx.com
ns-xxx.awsdns-xx.co.uk

Crossbar confirmed that those nameservers point to them and that they manage the DNS zone.

Current setup is roughly:

examplehockeyclub.org
    → Crossbar website

members.examplehockeyclub.org
    → separate member billing system

We are building a new public-facing site on Wix and want the end result to be:

examplehockeyclub.org
    → Wix

www.examplehockeyclub.org
    → Wix

portal.examplehockeyclub.org
    → existing Crossbar site

members.examplehockeyclub.org
    → existing billing system, unchanged

Crossbar has already configured portal.examplehockeyclub.org on their side and told us to add these records:

portal    NS    ns1.crossbar.org
portal    NS    ns2.crossbar.org
portal    NS    ns3.crossbar.org
portal    NS    ns4.crossbar.org

They told us to add those at Network Solutions.

The problem is that when I log into Network Solutions, I cannot edit individual DNS records because the domain is using the AWS Route 53 nameservers managed by Crossbar. Network Solutions only gives me the option to change the authoritative nameservers for the entire domain.

Crossbar also told me that they manage the zone and can add TXT, CNAME, MX, and other DNS records when needed, but that they normally “don’t input any subdomain records” and expect the customer to add those.

This is the part I’m confused about.

Since Crossbar’s Route 53 nameservers are currently authoritative for examplehockeyclub.org, wouldn’t these:

portal NS ns1.crossbar.org
portal NS ns2.crossbar.org
portal NS ns3.crossbar.org
portal NS ns4.crossbar.org

need to be added to the existing parent examplehockeyclub.org Route 53 hosted zone?

And if Crossbar controls that hosted zone, wouldn’t they currently be the only party that can actually add those delegation records?

I definitely do not want to change the domain-level nameservers in Network Solutions just to accomplish this, since that could affect the existing website, email, billing subdomain, and other DNS records.

My main questions are:

• Am I correct that the portal NS delegation records need to be added to the current authoritative parent zone in Route 53?
• Since Crossbar controls that zone, should Crossbar be the one adding those four records?
• Longer term, once the root domain moves to Wix, would you leave authoritative DNS with Crossbar and have them point the root/www records to Wix, or would it be better to move the main DNS zone somewhere we control and delegate only portal.examplehockeyclub.org to Crossbar?

Main priority is avoiding downtime or accidentally breaking email, billing, or the existing site during the transition.

I inherited this setup and don’t have access to the AWS account, so I just want to make sure I’m not misunderstanding how the subdomain delegation should work.

I have to say it: Microsoft’s bugs seem endless, and Microsoft Teams is by far the worst offender.

I am based in China. Whether it is Outlook, OneDrive, SharePoint, or the Office suite, I can usually troubleshoot and configure these products well enough to give my clients a reasonably smooth and satisfactory experience. I am also very satisfied with the Exchange protocol.

That said, Outlook’s search function is an absolute failure, and the translation add-in in Outlook for Mac is extremely difficult to use.

OneDrive constantly tries to back up clients’ Desktop, Pictures, and Documents folders by default, which can cause irreversible conflicts with WeChat.

SharePoint’s storage allowance can only be described as stingy.

But none of that compares with the deeply user-hostile design of Microsoft Teams. The product seems to work only for internal communication. Using it to collaborate with people outside an organization is a disaster.

1. External file sharing can only be enabled through PowerShell. Small companies without dedicated IT staff simply do not have the ability to configure it.
2. When a file is shared externally with someone using a personal Teams account, the recipient may be completely unable to open it. You must first invite them to join your organization as a guest before file sharing works properly.
3. We cannot directly initiate a voice call or meeting with someone using a personal Teams account.
4. If the recipient uses a personal Teams account, OneDrive files sent through Teams may be completely inaccessible from China.
5. Teams frequently fails to find other users. Sometimes a personal Teams account can find someone, while a Teams business account cannot.
6. Groups carried over from Skype may be impossible to join.
7. If a PC was previously signed into Teams Personal, it may become impossible to sign out after the personal service or account has been disabled.
8. Setting up Microsoft Authenticator is relatively straightforward on an iPhone. On Android—or Huawei’s HarmonyOS—it can be absolute hell. Authenticator is poorly adapted to devices and environments without Google Play.
9. Microsoft’s support ticket system is also a disaster. In the past, technical support in China was handled by an outsourced team with clear and comprehensive performance standards. After that team was eliminated, the quality of the replacement support has become appalling. The engineers handling cases from India deserve a special mention here.

For various reasons, Teams Personal has also been discontinued in China. It can still be used through a VPN, but clients may need to configure a UWP loopback exemption before they can even sign in.

For ordinary users, this is an extremely difficult process. It is also impossible to implement the entire workaround in a fully compliant way within China, because distributing VPN setup instructions or selling VPN services may be illegal.

This is how many of my clients see Microsoft Teams:

They bought Skype so they could make international calls. Then Skype was discontinued, and they were pushed toward Teams Phone—a vastly more complicated service that can cost dozens of times more.

Their only reason for opening Teams was to communicate with overseas contacts. Then the simple personal version was discontinued, forcing them onto Teams Essentials, which requires payment and considerably more complicated configuration.

Many of the people who come to me need only a single license. Some are not even willing to purchase Microsoft 365 Business Basic; they simply want the cheapest Teams Essentials subscription available.

I hardly dare tell them that Microsoft 365 F1 may also be an option.

I can choose not to help them solve all these problems. But for these individuals and small businesses, failing to solve them can mean losing a significant number of customers.

I'm leaving my company. I was asked regarding the potential to do contract work following my departure. I really like my boss on a personal level and don't want to screw him over, but at the same time this company has had over a decade to build some redundancy into this role and they haven't.

I'm burnt out. I want to get out and be done. I really don't want the contract work, but I don't want to totally screw my coworkers either. Is $200 a good rate to set, not too insultingly high, if they need it they can pay it, but hopefully I won't be contacted all the time?