Getting a big project started is often such a politically fraught process that for many managers it's easier to simply write a check.
Yes, politics all too often come into play when trying to get a project off the ground and started, especially in IT. But it has more to do with the politicians and the manager than it does with the actual IT staff. And I am not sure how putting it in the cloud avoids the politics? Any project of significance has to be run up the flag pole in any IT situation.
I am a network engineer for a county government that has it's hooks into state and federal level networks. Our political party is currently republican. So needless to say they hate all democrats. Any democratic IT idea or project that is started is immediately met with HUGE levels of opposition, while any ideas from their side is met with opposition from the democrats. There are also many cases where one party will get elected to the actual city government, while the county officials are from another party, which makes working together sometimes impossible.
IT and networking department are usually the worker bees, taking orders from their manager and higher ups, who all report to politicians of some sort at some point in the creative process. Getting rid of IT departments isn't the answer. Get rid of the politicians!!! If we remove the politics from most things, they will run better and most likely take 1/2 the time, which will ultimately reduce the cost of projects in man hours alone.
Haha you caught me. Forgot to multiply by 100! That said, it is still an abysmally low % when compared to how much we spend on defense and in other areas.
...Military spending looks like a waste until someone wants to take your stuff and you don't have the strength to prevent them...
Really? How can you argue FOR the huge defense budget? We have somewhere in the vicinity of 5000 nuclear warheads deployed or in stockpile (They plan to decommission enough by 2012 to return to "1957 numbers" of warheads, but everyone forgets how much more powerful they are today than they were in 1957). We could trigger a worldwide nuclear winter ourselves 50 times over without any other country firing a single shot. We still have 174,000 troops deployed world wide, with 60,000+ in Germany, 50,000+ in Japan, and 30,000+ in South Korea. Why? Your guess is as good as mine, because those wars ended long ago. The list goes on and on and on. How is that smart spending in a time of economic hardship? The tanks and missiles and ships aren't going anywhere. I guarantee calling back all troops deployed worldwide not currently engaged in Afghanistan would net a huge amount of $ that could be spent in a MUCH better place, especially now with the economy in the shitter. And that is just ONE example.
Really? Only $2Bil? When we are spending $708 Billion on defense? Why are we only putting up 0.0028% of the annual defense budget towards renewable, clean energy like this? Not sure how this makes sense. While it is nice to see a number in the Billions being put towards a project like this, I have a hard time taking the initiatives seriously when there are so many other bloated budgets we could chop down in size to put towards initiatives like this...
As a network engineer and someone who uses BackTrack at least once a week for penetration testing, it is obvious to bme that the people who come up with these laws have no idea about anything related to the field of network and server security. Why are these morons making the decisions?
"Someone didn't bother reading my carefully prepared memo on commonly-used passwords. Now, then, as I so meticulously pointed out, the four most-used passwords are: love, sex, secret, and...god. So, would your holiness care to change her password?" -Fisher Stevens; Hackers (1995)
<sarcasm>They used the word "Re-Up" in the title of this article. "Re-up" is a slang term for picking up a supply of drugs. That means the poster, Timothy, is most likely a drug dealer. Which means, by extrapolation, he purchases drugs from a larger supplier. Which also means those drugs most likely come from terrorists, who use the money to fund terrorist acts against the USA. Therefore, using the Transitive Property of Equality, we can now charge Timothy with treason and terrorism.
See? Protection is only a simple mathematical property away! </sarcasm>
"Other provisions allow authorities to obtain business and library records, and to target so-called “lone wolf” suspects who aren’t affiliated with any terrorist group."
a.k.a. Anyone. Say something negative about the government? You're a lone-wolf terrorist.
Sure, we aren't there yet. But doesn't that seem like where this is headed? That part scares the crap outta me. I had no idea that was in there.
What does "shot themselves in the foot" even mean in this context? Is it not "cool" enough for you or something?
No. I mean they created what is essentially another proprietary copper-based connector where there wasn't a need for one. Hence why nobody is picking it up. What is the purpose of this tech when USB 3.0 just came out? Exactly, there is none. It even costs more than USB 3.0 (about $2 a controller vs. more than $10 fir ThunderBolt). Nobody is going to use Thunderbolt on a USB 3.0 equipped mobo. Also, in the past when Intel had created standardized connectors (such as pioneering USB, SATA, etc), it created standards bodies and licensed it's designs royalty-free, and built coalitions before moving forward. There are no such standards bodies or coalitions for Thunderbolt and no 3rd party chip. Details of the protocol are still under tight wraps. Which can only suggest they intend to keep it as a proprietary connector.
What is this magic that they would have been able to do with fiber?
Ever worked with it? For a consumer connector it sucks. It's delicate, futzy about cleanliness, and really not much gain over copper. Hell, without huge waste and high expense it can't even carry power.
The "magic" is that current electrical cabling is reaching the limits of speed and cable length, something Light Peak would have been able to circumvent if they hadn't moved it onto a copper-based solution. It had a theoretical throughput of up to 100Gbps when it was based on fiber tech. That means you could have, theoretically, transferred a Blu-ray movie in as fast as 3 seconds. With file size continually increasing, this is the direction that peripheral connections should be moving in.
Also, as someone who works with Fiber every day, it is not has brittle as it used to be. And there is also fiber now that can bend and be handled close to what Ethernet could handle (sure you can't pinch it in your fingers and squeeze with all your might, but only an ass would do that), although it is more expensive. And while standard fiber connectors such as LC or SC are "fussy" about cleanliness, it usually isn't a huge issue unless it is really dirty, and the connector for an end user on a tech like LightPeak would have kept that in mind and not had the raw connector exposed like on standard fiber cables.
This tech was originally going to be based on fiber optics and was going to be called "LightPeak". Thing is, Intel's engineers were able to squeeze more throughput out of copper than they originally anticipated. That is a real shame. If it had been fiber based tech, it could have opened the door to the next level of peripheral connectivity. Instead they shot themselves in the foot. Funny that Apple picked it up though. Seems like a good place for it. lol
Typical Apple Fanboi response to a statement they can't defend against.
Fact is Apple products can get Malware. Regardless if it is user intervention or some kind of bug in the OS code that enables it, it can still get installed. So what do they do? They release a memo to have their reps be wholly unhelpful to their customers, neither confirming or denying anything, and instead pointing them towards the AppStore, to spend more $. The MAJORITY of the people calling in for tech support are just everyday mom and pop users that bought Apple products because they were told how they are "simple to use", "secure", and "With virtually no effort on your part" defends against viruses and malware. How is this fair to them?
At least Microsoft offers in-house solutions for Malware. And while they may not be THE BEST options, they help. If you have a legit copy of windows they will point you in the right direction on the phone as to how to remove the Malware or virus. They won't do it for you. But they won't DENY IT and send you to a web store to spend $. They send you a link to Microsoft Malicious Software Removal Tool and suggest some free programs to use. Apple's own website claims "A Mac isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. That’s thanks to built-in defenses in Mac OS X that keep you safe, without any work on your part." Those "built-in defenses" aren't defenses at all. They are relying on the fact that nobody had created much Malware for Apple products until recently. That is not defense. That is lack of caring.
Just because you have the technical skills to remove the malware easily and to understand that it isn't a big deal and that you don't need to call, other's don't. If Apple is so customer friendly and easy to use, they should have handled this situation better. And they should immediately start rolling out or starting to develop an in-house anti-virus and malware removal tool like Microsoft has.
...before people finally figure out that their basic civil liberties are being eroded? Why are there not marches on Washington over things like this? Has America become so lazy, stupid, and nonchalant that we are going to let this happen? I live in NY, and work with the police everyday at my job. If they tried to come into my house without a warrant, I sure as hell wouldn't let that happen. And I sure as hell wouldn't let it be ok and just go about my business like nothing wrong just happened if they did somehow come in.
The more news I read lately, the more depressed I get about America.
I think some of the younger Slashdotters are getting AIM and AOL confused. AOL was for Grandma. But when they released the stand-alone AIM client, that is when Instant Messenger took off. That was the ONLY cool thing about AOL, the instant messaging. All other Internet functions that AOL provided could be accomplished through other ISPs. I ALWAYS tried to get people off of using AOL as their ISP, but AIM? There was nothing wrong with it, especially after programs like Trillian and GAIM came out, or the hacks that removed the advertising off the free AIM client. I was on ICQ and IRC too, but ICQ was cumbersome and was immediately abandoned when AIM debuted by myself and most everyone else I knew. And IRC was not something that everyday users used even back then.
To this day, almost everyone I know that was on AIM is still on AIM. Even through my college years when Facebook debuted, we all still used AIM. I still run Pidgin to keep in touch with my friends on AIM, GTalk, etc. While most kids going through grade school the last half decade or so have been using Facebook and GTalk the way my generation used AIM and E-mail, there are many who still choose to use AIM, especially if they have an older sibling who grew up using AIM.
Actually, layer 3 switches are layer 3 switches, not routers. True routers (such as the Cisco 2600 series) are true routers. It's rare to see a true router used anymore in an enterprise network outside of simple VoIP setups running CME (Call manager Express) or the need for a T-card for T connection hand-offs. Other than that it can all be accomplished with a layer 3 switch. Layer 3 switches are almost always used for aggregate devices and routing purposes instead of routers. Also, preferably, you would want to VLAN off anything you can but in an environment with only 100 devices it is mostly unnecessary. A flat network would be much easier for them to setup. But when you build an enterprise level network, especially with an "unlimited" budget, you plan for future growth and you anticipate the future needs of the network. Having a layer 3 switch (such as a 3750) act as an aggregate device that the 2960's (which are layer 2 switches) collapse into, allows for future migration to a more heavily VLAN'd network, among other enhancements. Really, the wireless traffic and wired network should be inside their own vlan, especially if you plan of offering a public or guest SSID for non-company people to connect to. Also, I wouldn't recommend mixing vendor's on their first network they build. Different vendors can act weird with each other and have extra troubleshooting or setup steps not normally necessary if they'd stick with all Cisco or all of another brand, especially for the firewall/VPN device that will be controlling access in and out of the network.
Whoops yea I should have included some kind of aggregate layer 3 device like a 3750 or a similar device that all the 2960's collapse into. Read it 3 times and still missed something;)
1) Buy 3x 48 port Cisco 2960's will give you more than enough ports with some expandability (3 x 48 = 144 - 3 (for uplinks) = ~141 ports for devices) at a decent price, especially if you can get on some kind of discount contract (such as state price, etc.). Layer 3 switches are the way to go. Configure the switches inside a single vlan (unless you want to get fancy).
2) As long as you are getting an Ethernet hand-off from whatever ISP you are using (fiber seems unnecessary for 100 devices), get a Cisco ASA 5505 with the UNLIMITED license (ASA5505-UL-BUN-K9) so you won't have to deal with user licenses or if the network grows past the limited licenses. 5505's are perfect because they are super cheap and provide most of the functionality of a higher end model like a 5520 but are mostly just lacking GBIC slots for fiber handoffs. The ASA will act as your firewall, and allow for remote connections using VPN (using Cisco's awesome AnyConnect client). Follow online instructions for getting ASDM setup for the ASA so you don't have to deal with CLI and can do straight GUI configuration (very handy if you don't feel like learning to program an ASA from the command line).
3) Configure a simple network (with only 100 devices you can get away with a/24 mask on whatever subnet you use (255.255.255.0 mask). If you want you can go 255.255.254.0 and give yourself some extra breathing room if you think the network will grow past 254 unique devices. Configure your DHCP server (or whatever will hand out addresses for DHCP) to leave a range for static IP's that you will set on your servers. Workstations can pull DHCP as long as you have an internal DNS server so that people can remote to their desktops via the computer name. If not, then you'll need statics on your workstations as well for remote desktop.
4) Depending on your needs, you can add a few wireless access points to the mix as well to blanket the area in wireless. Preferably I like to use a controller (I use a 5508 @ work) but that might be overkill for you since you'd most likely only need a handful of access points. Although a 4400 with support for a limited number of AP's would be nice and on an "unlimited" budget, managing it is cake with the controller. Anyway, get the CIsco 1142's, esp if you go the controller route, since they can come with the LWAPP (Lightweight Access Point Protocol) enabled IOS image already on there. Don't forget to consider power/ethernet drops to where you will be placing the access points, and do a wireless survey with a test unit and a program like inSSIDer to gauge distances between where you should place them for maximum coverage.
I am a network engineer for my day job, and 1 of only 2 people who manage and maintain an enterprise network of over 5000 devices and ~8000 users. While we are stretched pretty thin, we manage to take care of that account and still have time to do things on other contracts (we are contractors), although there is a separate IT help desk staff at the main location to deal with specific user issues and workstation stuff so at least we aren't removing viruses and crap like that.
I did go to school for it (Bachelor's in Network Engineering) and got certifications, but really unless its a huge enterprise network there isn't much of a learning curve beyond the CLI commands and maybe wrapping your head around some ASA/Firewall stuff (NATs and Access Lists will be your main nemesis). Especially if they are giving you an unlimited budget, you can take a few classes to get the basics down ("Networking Fundamentals") and go from there if you are more comfortable having some kind of founcation. The biggest thing is getting used to the syntax of programming a device via CLI, and if you were a programmer you will most likely pick it up fast. If you can get your hands on a couple switches to play with, between that and Google you will be able to setup a fairly simple network to provide all the services I menti
...when I found out he decided to give up on fighting Sony. He was in the perfect position to score one for "good" but he folded like everyone else in that position. Regardless if he is donating the $ to EFF or whatever, that money I donated was to fight Sony specifically. If I wanted to donate to someone else I would have done that. Even if he was involved in this, I doubt anyone really cares what he does anymore.
Apparently, EFF Doesn't read the news, or Slashdot for that matter. Regardless if the guy was eventually exonerated, getting thrown to the ground at gun point and called a pedophile isn't exactly how I'd like to be rewarded for opening my wireless. Try again EFF. Open wireless is for monitored public initiatives, not for the average home user who has way more to lose (like their reputation and livelihood).
I'd like to see what company's are on the list. Specifically what IT companies. Even more specifically, if any network hardware providers made the list. Always fun to see what companies actually know networking that are selling the products that us in the field buy and put some measure of faith in to protect our networks. Same can be said for some software IT companies for end-users. I would be a bit more wary about considering a company's software protection product if they'd been compromised by one of the world's biggest botnets for X number of years and needed the FBI to call them up and tell them about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Getting a big project started is often such a politically fraught process that for many managers it's easier to simply write a check.
Yes, politics all too often come into play when trying to get a project off the ground and started, especially in IT. But it has more to do with the politicians and the manager than it does with the actual IT staff. And I am not sure how putting it in the cloud avoids the politics? Any project of significance has to be run up the flag pole in any IT situation.
I am a network engineer for a county government that has it's hooks into state and federal level networks. Our political party is currently republican. So needless to say they hate all democrats. Any democratic IT idea or project that is started is immediately met with HUGE levels of opposition, while any ideas from their side is met with opposition from the democrats. There are also many cases where one party will get elected to the actual city government, while the county officials are from another party, which makes working together sometimes impossible.
IT and networking department are usually the worker bees, taking orders from their manager and higher ups, who all report to politicians of some sort at some point in the creative process. Getting rid of IT departments isn't the answer. Get rid of the politicians!!! If we remove the politics from most things, they will run better and most likely take 1/2 the time, which will ultimately reduce the cost of projects in man hours alone.
Haha you caught me. Forgot to multiply by 100! That said, it is still an abysmally low % when compared to how much we spend on defense and in other areas.
...Military spending looks like a waste until someone wants to take your stuff and you don't have the strength to prevent them...
Really? How can you argue FOR the huge defense budget? We have somewhere in the vicinity of 5000 nuclear warheads deployed or in stockpile (They plan to decommission enough by 2012 to return to "1957 numbers" of warheads, but everyone forgets how much more powerful they are today than they were in 1957). We could trigger a worldwide nuclear winter ourselves 50 times over without any other country firing a single shot. We still have 174,000 troops deployed world wide, with 60,000+ in Germany, 50,000+ in Japan, and 30,000+ in South Korea. Why? Your guess is as good as mine, because those wars ended long ago. The list goes on and on and on. How is that smart spending in a time of economic hardship? The tanks and missiles and ships aren't going anywhere. I guarantee calling back all troops deployed worldwide not currently engaged in Afghanistan would net a huge amount of $ that could be spent in a MUCH better place, especially now with the economy in the shitter. And that is just ONE example.
...they keep pulling me back in...to the emergency room for more blood transfusions.
RAD +1!
Call them Lord Nikon. The King of Nynex.
Really? Only $2Bil? When we are spending $708 Billion on defense? Why are we only putting up 0.0028% of the annual defense budget towards renewable, clean energy like this? Not sure how this makes sense. While it is nice to see a number in the Billions being put towards a project like this, I have a hard time taking the initiatives seriously when there are so many other bloated budgets we could chop down in size to put towards initiatives like this...
As a network engineer and someone who uses BackTrack at least once a week for penetration testing, it is obvious to bme that the people who come up with these laws have no idea about anything related to the field of network and server security. Why are these morons making the decisions?
"Someone didn't bother reading my carefully prepared memo on commonly-used passwords. Now, then, as I so meticulously pointed out, the four most-used passwords are: love, sex, secret, and...god. So, would your holiness care to change her password?" -Fisher Stevens; Hackers (1995)
Thanks for making me have to google that shit. I had no idea how to even pronounce it before I did.
<sarcasm>They used the word "Re-Up" in the title of this article. "Re-up" is a slang term for picking up a supply of drugs. That means the poster, Timothy, is most likely a drug dealer. Which means, by extrapolation, he purchases drugs from a larger supplier. Which also means those drugs most likely come from terrorists, who use the money to fund terrorist acts against the USA. Therefore, using the Transitive Property of Equality, we can now charge Timothy with treason and terrorism.
See? Protection is only a simple mathematical property away! </sarcasm>
"Other provisions allow authorities to obtain business and library records, and to target so-called “lone wolf” suspects who aren’t affiliated with any terrorist group."
a.k.a. Anyone. Say something negative about the government? You're a lone-wolf terrorist.
Sure, we aren't there yet. But doesn't that seem like where this is headed? That part scares the crap outta me. I had no idea that was in there.
What does "shot themselves in the foot" even mean in this context? Is it not "cool" enough for you or something?
No. I mean they created what is essentially another proprietary copper-based connector where there wasn't a need for one. Hence why nobody is picking it up. What is the purpose of this tech when USB 3.0 just came out? Exactly, there is none. It even costs more than USB 3.0 (about $2 a controller vs. more than $10 fir ThunderBolt). Nobody is going to use Thunderbolt on a USB 3.0 equipped mobo. Also, in the past when Intel had created standardized connectors (such as pioneering USB, SATA, etc), it created standards bodies and licensed it's designs royalty-free, and built coalitions before moving forward. There are no such standards bodies or coalitions for Thunderbolt and no 3rd party chip. Details of the protocol are still under tight wraps. Which can only suggest they intend to keep it as a proprietary connector.
What is this magic that they would have been able to do with fiber?
Ever worked with it? For a consumer connector it sucks. It's delicate, futzy about cleanliness, and really not much gain over copper. Hell, without huge waste and high expense it can't even carry power.
The "magic" is that current electrical cabling is reaching the limits of speed and cable length, something Light Peak would have been able to circumvent if they hadn't moved it onto a copper-based solution. It had a theoretical throughput of up to 100Gbps when it was based on fiber tech. That means you could have, theoretically, transferred a Blu-ray movie in as fast as 3 seconds. With file size continually increasing, this is the direction that peripheral connections should be moving in.
Also, as someone who works with Fiber every day, it is not has brittle as it used to be. And there is also fiber now that can bend and be handled close to what Ethernet could handle (sure you can't pinch it in your fingers and squeeze with all your might, but only an ass would do that), although it is more expensive. And while standard fiber connectors such as LC or SC are "fussy" about cleanliness, it usually isn't a huge issue unless it is really dirty, and the connector for an end user on a tech like LightPeak would have kept that in mind and not had the raw connector exposed like on standard fiber cables.
This tech was originally going to be based on fiber optics and was going to be called "LightPeak". Thing is, Intel's engineers were able to squeeze more throughput out of copper than they originally anticipated. That is a real shame. If it had been fiber based tech, it could have opened the door to the next level of peripheral connectivity. Instead they shot themselves in the foot. Funny that Apple picked it up though. Seems like a good place for it. lol
You're a great big fucking douchebag.
Typical Apple Fanboi response to a statement they can't defend against.
Fact is Apple products can get Malware. Regardless if it is user intervention or some kind of bug in the OS code that enables it, it can still get installed. So what do they do? They release a memo to have their reps be wholly unhelpful to their customers, neither confirming or denying anything, and instead pointing them towards the AppStore, to spend more $. The MAJORITY of the people calling in for tech support are just everyday mom and pop users that bought Apple products because they were told how they are "simple to use", "secure", and "With virtually no effort on your part" defends against viruses and malware. How is this fair to them?
At least Microsoft offers in-house solutions for Malware. And while they may not be THE BEST options, they help. If you have a legit copy of windows they will point you in the right direction on the phone as to how to remove the Malware or virus. They won't do it for you. But they won't DENY IT and send you to a web store to spend $. They send you a link to Microsoft Malicious Software Removal Tool and suggest some free programs to use. Apple's own website claims "A Mac isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. That’s thanks to built-in defenses in Mac OS X that keep you safe, without any work on your part." Those "built-in defenses" aren't defenses at all. They are relying on the fact that nobody had created much Malware for Apple products until recently. That is not defense. That is lack of caring.
Just because you have the technical skills to remove the malware easily and to understand that it isn't a big deal and that you don't need to call, other's don't. If Apple is so customer friendly and easy to use, they should have handled this situation better. And they should immediately start rolling out or starting to develop an in-house anti-virus and malware removal tool like Microsoft has.
...before people finally figure out that their basic civil liberties are being eroded? Why are there not marches on Washington over things like this? Has America become so lazy, stupid, and nonchalant that we are going to let this happen? I live in NY, and work with the police everyday at my job. If they tried to come into my house without a warrant, I sure as hell wouldn't let that happen. And I sure as hell wouldn't let it be ok and just go about my business like nothing wrong just happened if they did somehow come in.
The more news I read lately, the more depressed I get about America.
I think some of the younger Slashdotters are getting AIM and AOL confused. AOL was for Grandma. But when they released the stand-alone AIM client, that is when Instant Messenger took off. That was the ONLY cool thing about AOL, the instant messaging. All other Internet functions that AOL provided could be accomplished through other ISPs. I ALWAYS tried to get people off of using AOL as their ISP, but AIM? There was nothing wrong with it, especially after programs like Trillian and GAIM came out, or the hacks that removed the advertising off the free AIM client. I was on ICQ and IRC too, but ICQ was cumbersome and was immediately abandoned when AIM debuted by myself and most everyone else I knew. And IRC was not something that everyday users used even back then.
To this day, almost everyone I know that was on AIM is still on AIM. Even through my college years when Facebook debuted, we all still used AIM. I still run Pidgin to keep in touch with my friends on AIM, GTalk, etc. While most kids going through grade school the last half decade or so have been using Facebook and GTalk the way my generation used AIM and E-mail, there are many who still choose to use AIM, especially if they have an older sibling who grew up using AIM.
There is already a device that can diagnose you as well as 1 doctor. It's called a Magic 8-Ball.
Actually, layer 3 switches are layer 3 switches, not routers. True routers (such as the Cisco 2600 series) are true routers. It's rare to see a true router used anymore in an enterprise network outside of simple VoIP setups running CME (Call manager Express) or the need for a T-card for T connection hand-offs. Other than that it can all be accomplished with a layer 3 switch. Layer 3 switches are almost always used for aggregate devices and routing purposes instead of routers. Also, preferably, you would want to VLAN off anything you can but in an environment with only 100 devices it is mostly unnecessary. A flat network would be much easier for them to setup. But when you build an enterprise level network, especially with an "unlimited" budget, you plan for future growth and you anticipate the future needs of the network. Having a layer 3 switch (such as a 3750) act as an aggregate device that the 2960's (which are layer 2 switches) collapse into, allows for future migration to a more heavily VLAN'd network, among other enhancements. Really, the wireless traffic and wired network should be inside their own vlan, especially if you plan of offering a public or guest SSID for non-company people to connect to. Also, I wouldn't recommend mixing vendor's on their first network they build. Different vendors can act weird with each other and have extra troubleshooting or setup steps not normally necessary if they'd stick with all Cisco or all of another brand, especially for the firewall/VPN device that will be controlling access in and out of the network.
Whoops yea I should have included some kind of aggregate layer 3 device like a 3750 or a similar device that all the 2960's collapse into. Read it 3 times and still missed something ;)
That is easy.
1) Buy 3x 48 port Cisco 2960's will give you more than enough ports with some expandability (3 x 48 = 144 - 3 (for uplinks) = ~141 ports for devices) at a decent price, especially if you can get on some kind of discount contract (such as state price, etc.). Layer 3 switches are the way to go. Configure the switches inside a single vlan (unless you want to get fancy).
2) As long as you are getting an Ethernet hand-off from whatever ISP you are using (fiber seems unnecessary for 100 devices), get a Cisco ASA 5505 with the UNLIMITED license (ASA5505-UL-BUN-K9) so you won't have to deal with user licenses or if the network grows past the limited licenses. 5505's are perfect because they are super cheap and provide most of the functionality of a higher end model like a 5520 but are mostly just lacking GBIC slots for fiber handoffs. The ASA will act as your firewall, and allow for remote connections using VPN (using Cisco's awesome AnyConnect client). Follow online instructions for getting ASDM setup for the ASA so you don't have to deal with CLI and can do straight GUI configuration (very handy if you don't feel like learning to program an ASA from the command line).
3) Configure a simple network (with only 100 devices you can get away with a /24 mask on whatever subnet you use (255.255.255.0 mask). If you want you can go 255.255.254.0 and give yourself some extra breathing room if you think the network will grow past 254 unique devices. Configure your DHCP server (or whatever will hand out addresses for DHCP) to leave a range for static IP's that you will set on your servers. Workstations can pull DHCP as long as you have an internal DNS server so that people can remote to their desktops via the computer name. If not, then you'll need statics on your workstations as well for remote desktop.
4) Depending on your needs, you can add a few wireless access points to the mix as well to blanket the area in wireless. Preferably I like to use a controller (I use a 5508 @ work) but that might be overkill for you since you'd most likely only need a handful of access points. Although a 4400 with support for a limited number of AP's would be nice and on an "unlimited" budget, managing it is cake with the controller. Anyway, get the CIsco 1142's, esp if you go the controller route, since they can come with the LWAPP (Lightweight Access Point Protocol) enabled IOS image already on there. Don't forget to consider power/ethernet drops to where you will be placing the access points, and do a wireless survey with a test unit and a program like inSSIDer to gauge distances between where you should place them for maximum coverage.
I am a network engineer for my day job, and 1 of only 2 people who manage and maintain an enterprise network of over 5000 devices and ~8000 users. While we are stretched pretty thin, we manage to take care of that account and still have time to do things on other contracts (we are contractors), although there is a separate IT help desk staff at the main location to deal with specific user issues and workstation stuff so at least we aren't removing viruses and crap like that.
I did go to school for it (Bachelor's in Network Engineering) and got certifications, but really unless its a huge enterprise network there isn't much of a learning curve beyond the CLI commands and maybe wrapping your head around some ASA/Firewall stuff (NATs and Access Lists will be your main nemesis). Especially if they are giving you an unlimited budget, you can take a few classes to get the basics down ("Networking Fundamentals") and go from there if you are more comfortable having some kind of founcation. The biggest thing is getting used to the syntax of programming a device via CLI, and if you were a programmer you will most likely pick it up fast. If you can get your hands on a couple switches to play with, between that and Google you will be able to setup a fairly simple network to provide all the services I menti
...when I found out he decided to give up on fighting Sony. He was in the perfect position to score one for "good" but he folded like everyone else in that position. Regardless if he is donating the $ to EFF or whatever, that money I donated was to fight Sony specifically. If I wanted to donate to someone else I would have done that. Even if he was involved in this, I doubt anyone really cares what he does anymore.
Apparently, EFF Doesn't read the news, or Slashdot for that matter. Regardless if the guy was eventually exonerated, getting thrown to the ground at gun point and called a pedophile isn't exactly how I'd like to be rewarded for opening my wireless. Try again EFF. Open wireless is for monitored public initiatives, not for the average home user who has way more to lose (like their reputation and livelihood).
I'd like to see what company's are on the list. Specifically what IT companies. Even more specifically, if any network hardware providers made the list. Always fun to see what companies actually know networking that are selling the products that us in the field buy and put some measure of faith in to protect our networks. Same can be said for some software IT companies for end-users. I would be a bit more wary about considering a company's software protection product if they'd been compromised by one of the world's biggest botnets for X number of years and needed the FBI to call them up and tell them about it.
the Application Procurement Program for Licensed End-users
That should avoid any further lawsuits.