Ooh, this TrainerRoad thing looks good. Is it worth it?

Just ordered a set off the back of this thread; thanks guys.

Neninja, my order ref ends in 73, could you email me to confirm the delivery address as paypal is trying to send it to my home address and I wanted it to go to work :)

Cheers

Neil

MTB Rob:

– I couldn’t find the bar end plug for that side, it had succumbed to the Gods of Fridgesuck.
– The forks are F120’s, and perfect for it – new SKF seals and default fluid levels, and feeling lovely
– I was going to swap the uppers as well but the white uppers I have are OEM ones I think which are slightly different, so I had to go for grey upper, white lower, which I quite like :)
– Yes. Yes. and Yes. Do it, but only if you can it efficiently as it can get expensive quickly if your wheel can’t be converted and you can find the right fork lowers.

Right, now I’m at work, I’ve plenty of time to upload photos and generally do everything but work.

I might start by quantifying my opinion, my previous Charge Duster was built as such:

I loved it. Fast, flickable and fun.

However, I kept hearing all sorts of things about the Soul and it kept burning away at me – I wonder if it were really all that they were cracked up to be.

So I devised a plan. I ended up with this lot:

Ironically, the only difference between the Charge and the Cotic is about half a pound in weight and 20mm on the top tube. It’s identical pretty much everywhere else (dunno about the angles tho).

The On One was heavy, and built like a brick sh1t house – I’m sure it’s a great frame, especially on a budget, but it wasn’t for me.

So, this weekend I built this:

And thrashed it mercilessly around AC/LW to see what happened. What happened (in between dodging the Sunday dawdlers) was that I went blooming quickly. It moves around very nicely, it’s very zingy, lots of feel coming from the rear which meant that I knew when it was about to break away and all in all, just a bloomin lovely ride.

I’m toying with trying a 50mm or 60mm stem as opposed to the 70mm that is on there at the mo, but it’s everything they all say it is.

50mm on my 2011 one, and now on my replacement 2012 one (slightly different angles and lengths etc) I’m running a 70mm.

I like my bikes smaller, and have 33″ inside leg…

^^^ +2

6′ 3″ and happily rocking about on a medium.

Good to hear chaps, good to hear. I’d be very sad if this went forward and would likely mean I would look to change where I live (i.e. out of Bristol) as the commute by bike is one of key draws for me.

Make it dangerous, and I’m less likely to want to risk life and limb to work in a busy city.

Rode Ashton Court last night with a few of the locals, and we all agreed that autumn has properly arrived; mainly signalled by the significant leaf droppage on the Quarry Trail…

And the rain.

And the wind.

And the light disappearing quickly.

Bah.

I’ve already a brand new set of Float 140’s that I’d like to use, hence the requirement.

I’ve already got a Charge Duster with F120’s and would like to upgrade really.

At the moment, a CEN Soul is pretty much all there is that fits the hammertime/lightish requirement. I’m not launching off the Chatel gaps every day however.

Erm, not wishing to pop anyones balloons, but that article is from 2010.

If anyone is interested I’ve a set of brand new funky red anodised Formula RX1’s?

I went for XTR instead 8)

In this case, I would seriously consider building your business case around two angles:

1. More tin to manage the infrastructure required to cover the unmanaged clients, via NAP, or a more specific IDS or TDS box/system which sits behind the VPN and in front of the internal network in order to manage ALL traffic going in and out (commonly know as defence in depth) OR
2. Buy laptops, and manage the rollout with GPO and WDS to make your life easier.

That said, looks like they’re not being really very sympathetic to the real requirements here – it’s a hornets nest.

I’m presuming you have no requirements for IL3 and upwards or encryption, because if you do, your life has just become hell.

The RDS authentication is the last thing you’re needing to worry about at the moment. If the user jumps through all the hoops to GET to the RDS server, you’ll be fairly confident it’ll be safe.

Without pointing out the bleeding obvious, but why are these users not being given their own managed laptops to connect in? Would save all this faffing.

As soon as you present the user to anything internally via your tunnel, you need to manage the client for compromised issues.

Your remote servers are the least of your worries in that case.

I’m presuming you’re segregating the subnet for VPN users away from the internal LANs/subnets?

NAP is your friend in this instance, it is specifically built for this purpose, forcing a user to wait and be checked against policy before allowing access to resources.

With a new baby myself, a 9 month old, it’s started to trigger the most horrible feelings and fear inside me when I see things like this.

So horrific.

ETA: Reading on, it’s just made me well up.

Molgrips has a point. If you’re worried about either, then you could consider implementing a NAP server to ensure nothing gets onto the LAN until fully patched and updated.

If you’re using Win XP clients to connect to a W2k8 server, update to the latest Remote Desktop client software on the client and then you can force a requirement to use Network Level Authentication on the Remote Desktop properties on the server. W7 has it installed by default.

Two form factor is your first port of call; once someones into your network, no amount of security helps. Start on the outside and move in.

Surely you only allow port 3389 connectivity to IP’s on the VPN lan to the TS server?

That way you know that providing that so long as you’re using SSL VPN to get to it, you’re sorted, and is pretty much what most people do.

However, if you want to tighten up the authentication to the RDS server you have three choices:

“You can enhance the security of RD Session Host sessions by using Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) Transport Layer Security (TLS 1.0) for server authentication and to encrypt RD Session Host communications. The RD Session Host server and the client computer must be correctly configured for TLS to provide enhanced security.

The three available security layers are:
– SSL (TLS 1.0) SSL (TLS 1.0) will be used for server authentication and for encrypting all data transferred between the server and the client.
– Negotiate The most secure layer that is supported by the client will be used. If supported, SSL (TLS 1.0) will be used. If the client does not support SSL (TLS 1.0), the RDP Security Layer will be used. This is the default setting.
– RDP Security Layer Communication between the server and the client will use native RDP encryption. If you select RDP Security Layer, you cannot use Network Level Authentication.”

Read here: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ff458357.aspx

Personally, I’d be happy with two form factor SSL VPN access only for users whom need to get to the RDS servers.

ps might be worth telling us what infrastructure you’re using (i.e. W2k8, etc).

Well, if we’re showing…it isn’t as posh as your vans though…

This is such a nerdy conversation. It’s awesome :D

We stupidly went in without really knowing what we were buying; we were drawn in by it being fitted with a gas combi boiler and a 4 hob gas burner…

We paid £1650 for a 1995 Lunar Delta 560/4 4 berth, and it’s perfect for us.

Shame it’s not so perfect when it comes to damp – we’ve just uncovered some horrific damp (see here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/neil_bolton/sets/72157631382509724/ ) which we’re already getting on with sorting.

Our BMW 530D Touring (manual) tows it brilliantly, with it keeping to 60 all the way up Telegraph Hill nr Newton Abbot! It’s great to be able to get away and take the bike – Haldon was great fun :)

Molgrips – you’ve done some work on caravans haven’t you? Fancy offline helping me with a few questions?

Erm.

I’ve just joined the club now.

>holdshandupslowly<

OOOOOOOOH!

>getsreallyexcited<

I think you’ve more to worry about by offending peoples OCD than anything.

>twitch<

Wow, that 29er is stunning.

Just to put into context what I consider a properly dodgy commute, I used to ride out of central Cardiff daily to St Mellons along the A48 dual carraigeway.

It was proper hairy along there, so the Portway is nothing compared to that (especially when the Portway is stationary yet again because of Bridge Valley Rd.

That said, the A48 used to be fun when the traffic slowed to about 20-25mph, as I used to often be able to get a tow from the lorries for a while :)

Used to raise an eyebrow or two that did. Can’t say I’d do it now I’m 10 years older.

tallie: You could argue, feasibly, that as the path will often have pedestrians on it, that the cycle path should require a speed limit on it.

Not that it’d ever be enforceable, nor sensible, but it would be quite sensible as in your example.

Which leads me to completely agree with riding on the road in that respect – you can easily hit some decent speeds on a road bike, and so the road is arguably the better place in that case.

Just throwing it out there, you know.

Wallop, agreed – that end is a bloody nightmare. Uncomfortable is probably the ideal word to describe that cycle path – never found myself enjoying it, which is a shame, as it’s got a bloody lovely view.

I commute nearly every day down the infamous Portway underneath the suspension bridge. I’m very lucky in that it is a relatively relaxed affair compared to the all out warfare that I used to encounter through the middle of town previously when I lived in Clifton.

That said, I tried the cycle path along the Portway for a while and found that it was bumpy, quite often littered with crap, and you’re constantly hit with the 50mph backdraft of the huge lorries that are only 6 ft from you.

Add into that the random signs and general bits and bobs along the way, and you end up with a pretty fraught journey (there have been a few near misses where I’ve nearly drifted into a signpost). Add into that people who just don’t get the left/right thing right, that and the fact that some feel that it’s quite alright to wobble about in the middle of the path means that I have been using the bus lane more often.

It’s the lesser of two evils – the motorbikes scare the shit out of me as they neeeow past, and the buses are generally quite respectful, and most of the time I never see one, and if I do, I know I won’t see another (based on the park and ride timetable).

It’s also smoother, quicker (really) and less stressful all around; I only have to cross the road back onto the cycle path for a bit until I then negotiate the docks through past the SS Great Britain (lovely bit that is).

I’ll also sit on the dual carraigeway on the way back for a similar reason – the surface is better and I don’t need to worry about dodging other path users.

Quite often, it’s just easier to sit on the bigger roads rather than a cycle path as you can just get your head down and bash out the miles – the paths are often very disruptive to maintain a decent pace and rhythm.

Mr Agreeable, can you email me on Neil . Bolton @ gmail . com – I’m hoping you’re in touch with those coppers in the team – I might be able to help them with something with regards to what I do at work (very secret squirrel).

You’re right – but then I’ve heard reports of mobiles being used also to ring ahead.

Either way, they seemed a bit dodgy (I’m not being racist, just that they were black, and if I’m to be honest, MTBing around Bristol does tend to be a mainly populated by white male Audi driving IT workers)

We could do with coming up with some help for people in terms of how to minimise being tagged – such as don’t leave via the gatehouse or encourage use of some of the more obscure exits – but then that goes against the ethos of the trails that have been built…

More than likely this is how mine went last weekend.

Were these lads black by any chance, and hanging around the picnic bench by the finish of the Quarry trail? I saw them at about 6.30 ish and did wonder…

Is that a really stiff door handle, or a really easy door handle?

Is it just me, or does that rear shock look teeny?

Guess they don’t need a big air can, for various reasons.

>listensintently<

Did the same myself, sheared the base valve right off.

:(

ETA: LoCo sorted it for me rather efficiently and cheaply :D

Worked fine for my on my Zesty, never dropped it in the time I used it including DHy stuff.

So good in fact, I’m after another.

+1
I find riding about 5mm off their rear wheel on the downs gets the message across.

+2

Especially when on a hardtail.

Nah, it’s the image thing.

Since getting fitter and rediscovering my road bike, the legs were shaved and the lycra dug out from behind the baggies.

Although I rode my Duster in this morning (in baggies) I was pondering about whether a set of wide flat bars with bar ends may be in order – something quite nice about getting back to riding ‘fast’ rather than ‘agressively’…

If you get my drift.

Pyro, that’s properly made me giggle in the office that has :D