Creating a new server/office network for a small office with large data requirements
Tags:
- Office
-
Servers
-
Business Computing
Last response: in Business Computing
NickHart
July 4, 2013 4:10:34 AM
Hi all, thanks in advance for any comments/help.
I am in the fortunate?(maybe unfortunate) position of being charged with the creation and implementation of a new office network and server for a company with a very small but very data heavy office (approx 40 people). The company processes vast amounts of data it gets from its FTP server (this will not be changing) However it currently runs a very old server that is failing, and all desktops apart from 1 or 2 are XP, those not xp have serious issues with losing connection to the server which i beleive is a compatibility issue. I cant get into the current server as it is owned by a company (that does a horrible job) who wont let anyone near it without threatening breach of contract.
My intial plan is to upgrade the desktops and infrastructure of the office to CAT5E and win7 (i realize win8 is a little...different? but this needs to last 5+ years as a system so will windows 7 suffice in terms of the server compatibility with windows 2012 essentials?).
The server i was planning on using is windows essential business server as i am worried windows 2012 essentials (basically SBS) will be too restrictive due to the number of users from what i have read being listed at 25. However i realize that EBS has been discontinued which worries me. I dont want to force CITRIX on the office because for the most part this would be a huge system shock as everyone is comfortable with a windows system.
What i need from the server is, User/work groups (HR/ADMIN/ANALYSIS) that only members of that work group can access. Good security/firewall, ability to implement netop, printing management/restrictions (work groups/designated users cannot print in color or print pictures unless permission granted). Large storage capacity which im planning to use DAS for which backups to a NAS then monthly archives to a second NAS. The workgroups would only have access to different partitions (their designated partitions) of the DAS, with a public "dropbox" type area for inter departmental documents.
It would also be useful to have remote access for users.
The basic outline of data travel is FIELD -> FTP/VPS ->SBS/DAS -> USER ->SBS/DAS
We have software that was developed to work for xp, but does work on win7, which is why i am thinking of win7 with the desktops (that and the win8 UI is a little...unweildy for those further from the bleeding edge of software).
Any reccomendations or problems you guys can see with this? All productive comments are welcome!
P.S. We would be having a contractor install the system and i would manage it, i am not a networking professional simply the most apt at IT in the office, although i do understand hardware well.
EDIT: hiring a consultant is not an option due to red tape/parent company decisions.
EDIT: If you feel something of this is wrong, please dont only point out the issue but also provide some alternative or method that would work better.
I am in the fortunate?(maybe unfortunate) position of being charged with the creation and implementation of a new office network and server for a company with a very small but very data heavy office (approx 40 people). The company processes vast amounts of data it gets from its FTP server (this will not be changing) However it currently runs a very old server that is failing, and all desktops apart from 1 or 2 are XP, those not xp have serious issues with losing connection to the server which i beleive is a compatibility issue. I cant get into the current server as it is owned by a company (that does a horrible job) who wont let anyone near it without threatening breach of contract.
My intial plan is to upgrade the desktops and infrastructure of the office to CAT5E and win7 (i realize win8 is a little...different? but this needs to last 5+ years as a system so will windows 7 suffice in terms of the server compatibility with windows 2012 essentials?).
The server i was planning on using is windows essential business server as i am worried windows 2012 essentials (basically SBS) will be too restrictive due to the number of users from what i have read being listed at 25. However i realize that EBS has been discontinued which worries me. I dont want to force CITRIX on the office because for the most part this would be a huge system shock as everyone is comfortable with a windows system.
What i need from the server is, User/work groups (HR/ADMIN/ANALYSIS) that only members of that work group can access. Good security/firewall, ability to implement netop, printing management/restrictions (work groups/designated users cannot print in color or print pictures unless permission granted). Large storage capacity which im planning to use DAS for which backups to a NAS then monthly archives to a second NAS. The workgroups would only have access to different partitions (their designated partitions) of the DAS, with a public "dropbox" type area for inter departmental documents.
It would also be useful to have remote access for users.
The basic outline of data travel is FIELD -> FTP/VPS ->SBS/DAS -> USER ->SBS/DAS
We have software that was developed to work for xp, but does work on win7, which is why i am thinking of win7 with the desktops (that and the win8 UI is a little...unweildy for those further from the bleeding edge of software).
Any reccomendations or problems you guys can see with this? All productive comments are welcome!
P.S. We would be having a contractor install the system and i would manage it, i am not a networking professional simply the most apt at IT in the office, although i do understand hardware well.
EDIT: hiring a consultant is not an option due to red tape/parent company decisions.
EDIT: If you feel something of this is wrong, please dont only point out the issue but also provide some alternative or method that would work better.
More about : creating server office network small office large data requirements
From the Server 2012 Essentials FAQ:
"Windows Server 2012 Essentials is a flexible, affordable, and easy-to-use server solution designed and priced for small businesses with up to 25 users and 50 devices"
"Windows Server 2012 Essentials is a flexible, affordable, and easy-to-use server solution designed and priced for small businesses with up to 25 users and 50 devices"
m
0
l
Related resources
- small medium sized office, data network intermittently becoming so busy everyone bandwidth drops to virtually zero - Forum
- Steps of creating a network in a small office - Forum
- Creating small office network - Forum
- How do I create a small office network? tell me the procedures one by one please - Forum
NickHart
July 4, 2013 4:59:31 AM
USAFRet said:
From the Server 2012 Essentials FAQ:"Windows Server 2012 Essentials is a flexible, affordable, and easy-to-use server solution designed and priced for small businesses with up to 25 users and 50 devices"
What would you suggest to replace that?
Also this outline is what was suggested by a "free" consultant, another companies networking guy giving an opinion. Its not exactly perfect, but there is no option to hire our own.
m
0
l
NickHart said:
USAFRet said:
From the Server 2012 Essentials FAQ:"Windows Server 2012 Essentials is a flexible, affordable, and easy-to-use server solution designed and priced for small businesses with up to 25 users and 50 devices"
What would you suggest to replace that?
Also this outline is what was suggested by a "free" consultant, another companies networking guy giving an opinion. Its not exactly perfect, but there is no option to hire our own.
Well, it's like this. You can hire a competent local consultant now and have things working right. Or you can build it, and hire a competent consultant in 6 months or a year to fix it. At twice the price.
I understand wanting to conserve money. But there are some things you can't cheap out on. Bosses often don't see the IT infrastructure as something to spend money on, but it is the essential underpinning of the whole enterprise.
When things start going bad, how much money will you lose per day? The consultant will be pennies compared to that.
As you say, you are not a networking guy. But that is exactly what you need in this situation.
m
0
l
NickHart
July 4, 2013 5:08:47 AM
USAFRet said:
NickHart said:
USAFRet said:
From the Server 2012 Essentials FAQ:"Windows Server 2012 Essentials is a flexible, affordable, and easy-to-use server solution designed and priced for small businesses with up to 25 users and 50 devices"
What would you suggest to replace that?
Also this outline is what was suggested by a "free" consultant, another companies networking guy giving an opinion. Its not exactly perfect, but there is no option to hire our own.
Well, it's like this. You can hire a competent local consultant now and have things working right. Or you can build it, and hire a competent consultant in 6 months or a year to fix it. At twice the price.
I understand wanting to conserve money. But there are some things you can't cheap out on. Bosses often don't see the IT infrastructure as something to spend money on, but it is the essential underpinning of the whole enterprise.
When things start going bad, how much money will you lose per day? The consultant will be pennies compared to that.
As you say, you are not a networking guy. But that is exactly what you need in this situation.
You are preaching to the choir my friend, however, as i said mine and our companies hands are tied. And the system above you have found some issue with was devised by a qualified networking guy. So you begin to see my problem.
m
0
l
NickHart said:
You are preaching to the choir my friend, however, as i said mine and our companies hands are tied. And the system above you have found some issue with was devised by a qualified networking guy. So you begin to see my problem.
If he is advising Essential Business Server (discontinued 3 years ago), or Server 2012 Essentials, I'd question the 'qualified' part. Qualified to run a network maybe. But design one? I don't see it.
MS doesn't even recommend the EBS anymore.
I'd say start with either Server 2008 R2, or Server 2012. But there are soooo many other things to take into account, that recommending a particular server platform is useless.
Email server? Domain controllers? Border security? Failover servers? Daily/weekly backups? Virtualization? How is the office designed? How many switches/routers? How much is "vast amounts of data"? What happens when a drive dies (and one will)?
You have to spec out all the different parts and functions long before deciding on a particular platform.
m
0
l
Tabris DarkPeace
July 4, 2013 5:33:43 AM
This is a typical homework assignment question for Certificate IV in Information Technology.
- The 'upgrading the network to cat5e' and other comments, such as the FTP server within a LAN, gives it away so badly.
The whole point of this is LEARNING and DOING THE THINKING YOURSELF over about a FORTNIGHT (2 weeks).
I am assuming that you are studying a Cert IV in Networking or perhaps a Diploma in Networking and you've slacked off or slept through class?
- The 'upgrading the network to cat5e' and other comments, such as the FTP server within a LAN, gives it away so badly.
The whole point of this is LEARNING and DOING THE THINKING YOURSELF over about a FORTNIGHT (2 weeks).
I am assuming that you are studying a Cert IV in Networking or perhaps a Diploma in Networking and you've slacked off or slept through class?
m
0
l
NickHart
July 4, 2013 5:39:55 AM
USAFRet said:
NickHart said:
You are preaching to the choir my friend, however, as i said mine and our companies hands are tied. And the system above you have found some issue with was devised by a qualified networking guy. So you begin to see my problem.
If he is advising Essential Business Server (discontinued 3 years ago), or Server 2012 Essentials, I'd question the 'qualified' part. Qualified to run a network maybe. But design one? I don't see it.
MS doesn't even recommend the EBS anymore.
I'd say start with either Server 2008 R2, or Server 2012. But there are soooo many other things to take into account, that recommending a particular server platform is useless.
Email server? Domain controllers? Border security? Failover servers? Daily/weekly backups? Virtualization? How is the office designed? How many switches/routers? How much is "vast amounts of data"? What happens when a drive dies (and one will)?
You have to spec out all the different parts and functions long before deciding on a particular platform.
I believe he said he calls it EBS, but he means windows server 2012 (standard). the office is set up with 5 depts, all wired through 6 routers. He proposed using Direct Attached Storage to the server, running RAID (12TB). This would be split up into work/usergroups + a dropbox area for inter departmental document transfers. To this there would be 2 NAS servers of 12 and 30 TB respectively, the smaller of the 2 used as a active backup to the DAS and the larger of the 2 being used as a long term archive. We do not need an email hosting as this is catered for by our US counterparts, we currently have around 3TB of data growing by 3TB every year for the next 5 years (projected but more is expected). There will also be a large USB backup to be used in the case of a HDD failing to secure data while it is replaced.
That is as far as he got. How does this sound?
m
0
l
NickHart
July 4, 2013 5:41:19 AM
Tabris DarkPeace said:
This is a typical homework assignment question for Certificate IV in Information Technology.- The 'upgrading the network to cat5e' and other comments, such as the FTP server within a LAN, gives it away so badly.
The whole point of this is LEARNING and DOING THE THINKING YOURSELF over about a FORTNIGHT (2 weeks).
I am assuming that you are studying a Cert IV in Networking or perhaps a Diploma in Networking and you've slacked off or slept through class?
Please keep your jokes to yourself, the FTP is not within a LAN it is hosted over 300 miles away from our office.
m
0
l
Best solution
This is a pretty massive undertaking for a single person to take on with limited experience. Believe me, I don't think anyone here is trying to insult you with that, if anything trying to warn you that this is a delicate thing that can easily become much more difficult and costly to fix if not addressed properly the first time.
First, let's talk about the OSes since that is something that has already been discussed. With this type of environment, you need to virtualize as much as you can to help with fault-tolerance, flexibility, and growth. What kind of budget are you working with to get this project going? You may really consider going to high-availability if you have a lot of people and business-critical systems working from off these servers. Basically, if one of your servers goes down, how does it affect the business? Are the dead in the water until a replacement server or part can be found, shipped, and installed? If this is unacceptable, then they need to be considering a high-available server cluster, which isn't cheap. For your primary servers I'd recommend Server 2012 Standard. Server 2008 R2 is the most common staple of Windows Server OS out there, but it's being phased out. Server 2012 can do everything 2008 can do and then some, and if this is something that needs to last without modifying or redoing for years, then you need to go with the newer platform to give you the support and flexibility into the future. You can virtualize and even create a cluster environment all from the Server 2012 Standard licensing. A lot of people prefer to set up their virtualization using VMWare, however, and it all comes down to the experience and preference of the person who is going to be setting this up and managing it.
Next, I want to address the network design, as this is going to influence your whole server and network infrastructure. You said you currently have several different departments and they are all behind their own routers? This seems pretty clunky when instead the office should be utilizing VLANs. This can make sharing resources, such as printers and servers, much more feasible. Plus, instead of having to configure and manage each network zone individually at each router, you can configure your whole network from a single router or firewall. I personally use Sonicwall firewalls for this sort of thing, and they have a huge line of different products from small home office firewalls to corporate environments.
If I were doing this project, I would look into setting up one primary network, separated out into VLANs for each department, and utilize a single router/firewall to control the VLANs for ease of network traversal and performance. You can even set up fault-tolerant routers and firewalls in the event your primary unit fails. This firewall would then be connected to gigabit VLAN capable switches for the access layer to each end device. You may also want a separate "core" switch that connects up all your datacenter infrastructure and your access layer switches.
So, we now have the VLANs established, but we need to manage user accounts, access controls, and folder/file sharing access permissions within each of these groups. Without VLANs, you'd pretty much have to set up a physical server in each separate network zone (you referred to them as workgroups) to manage files and users in each separate network. Now, however, we can use our virtualization server cluster to create virtual machines. Basically, we can use one physical server and assign a virtual machine on that physical hardware to each of the VLANs as a domain controller. Much more cost effective! The domain controllers will manage user accounts and file sharing permissions to all the users in that VLAN, but can also be used for authentication to shared resources. For instance, printers, servers, and any other network devices needing to be accessed by multiple departments will be placed into their own "shared" VLAN and network and user access can be allowed to resources from other VLANs as needed without actually allowing the department networks to communicate with each other. You can do the same thing with printer services either with separate virtual machines or includes on the same VM that is your domain controller.
Then we come to storage needs. This is a huge component of your network, and part of it is going to be determined by whether you go with high-availability and a server cluster, which will required shared centralized storage appliances like a SAN (storage area network, not to be confused with NAS) which will store and run your virtual machines. You can then invest in a nice storage server running Storage Server 2012 or similar that will act as your NAS for storing actual user files. You can do periodic backups from this device, of course, but for now start off with a cheap multi-bay NAS device or even external hard drives, and invest the savings into your original NAS to get the best performance and capacity you can for room to grow. There is a huge amount to talk about and determine when it comes to your storage needs, and a lot of that comes down to knowing more details about your business environment. We might be able to give you more detailed recommendations as well with a little more information on your needs.
Finally, don't be afraid to contact some experts. On projects like these I even contact into Dell and HP for consulting and getting pricing information together. It's never going to hurt to contact into their server and storage specialists, go over some information on the project, and see what they recommend and what kind of pricing they will put together for you.
First, let's talk about the OSes since that is something that has already been discussed. With this type of environment, you need to virtualize as much as you can to help with fault-tolerance, flexibility, and growth. What kind of budget are you working with to get this project going? You may really consider going to high-availability if you have a lot of people and business-critical systems working from off these servers. Basically, if one of your servers goes down, how does it affect the business? Are the dead in the water until a replacement server or part can be found, shipped, and installed? If this is unacceptable, then they need to be considering a high-available server cluster, which isn't cheap. For your primary servers I'd recommend Server 2012 Standard. Server 2008 R2 is the most common staple of Windows Server OS out there, but it's being phased out. Server 2012 can do everything 2008 can do and then some, and if this is something that needs to last without modifying or redoing for years, then you need to go with the newer platform to give you the support and flexibility into the future. You can virtualize and even create a cluster environment all from the Server 2012 Standard licensing. A lot of people prefer to set up their virtualization using VMWare, however, and it all comes down to the experience and preference of the person who is going to be setting this up and managing it.
Next, I want to address the network design, as this is going to influence your whole server and network infrastructure. You said you currently have several different departments and they are all behind their own routers? This seems pretty clunky when instead the office should be utilizing VLANs. This can make sharing resources, such as printers and servers, much more feasible. Plus, instead of having to configure and manage each network zone individually at each router, you can configure your whole network from a single router or firewall. I personally use Sonicwall firewalls for this sort of thing, and they have a huge line of different products from small home office firewalls to corporate environments.
If I were doing this project, I would look into setting up one primary network, separated out into VLANs for each department, and utilize a single router/firewall to control the VLANs for ease of network traversal and performance. You can even set up fault-tolerant routers and firewalls in the event your primary unit fails. This firewall would then be connected to gigabit VLAN capable switches for the access layer to each end device. You may also want a separate "core" switch that connects up all your datacenter infrastructure and your access layer switches.
So, we now have the VLANs established, but we need to manage user accounts, access controls, and folder/file sharing access permissions within each of these groups. Without VLANs, you'd pretty much have to set up a physical server in each separate network zone (you referred to them as workgroups) to manage files and users in each separate network. Now, however, we can use our virtualization server cluster to create virtual machines. Basically, we can use one physical server and assign a virtual machine on that physical hardware to each of the VLANs as a domain controller. Much more cost effective! The domain controllers will manage user accounts and file sharing permissions to all the users in that VLAN, but can also be used for authentication to shared resources. For instance, printers, servers, and any other network devices needing to be accessed by multiple departments will be placed into their own "shared" VLAN and network and user access can be allowed to resources from other VLANs as needed without actually allowing the department networks to communicate with each other. You can do the same thing with printer services either with separate virtual machines or includes on the same VM that is your domain controller.
Then we come to storage needs. This is a huge component of your network, and part of it is going to be determined by whether you go with high-availability and a server cluster, which will required shared centralized storage appliances like a SAN (storage area network, not to be confused with NAS) which will store and run your virtual machines. You can then invest in a nice storage server running Storage Server 2012 or similar that will act as your NAS for storing actual user files. You can do periodic backups from this device, of course, but for now start off with a cheap multi-bay NAS device or even external hard drives, and invest the savings into your original NAS to get the best performance and capacity you can for room to grow. There is a huge amount to talk about and determine when it comes to your storage needs, and a lot of that comes down to knowing more details about your business environment. We might be able to give you more detailed recommendations as well with a little more information on your needs.
Finally, don't be afraid to contact some experts. On projects like these I even contact into Dell and HP for consulting and getting pricing information together. It's never going to hurt to contact into their server and storage specialists, go over some information on the project, and see what they recommend and what kind of pricing they will put together for you.
Share
Tabris DarkPeace
July 4, 2013 7:29:41 AM
NickHart
July 4, 2013 7:54:14 AM
choucove said:
This is a pretty massive undertaking for a single person to take on with limited experience. Believe me, I don't think anyone here is trying to insult you with that, if anything trying to warn you that this is a delicate thing that can easily become much more difficult and costly to fix if not addressed properly the first time.First, let's talk about the OSes since that is something that has already been discussed. With this type of environment, you need to virtualize as much as you can to help with fault-tolerance, flexibility, and growth. What kind of budget are you working with to get this project going? You may really consider going to high-availability if you have a lot of people and business-critical systems working from off these servers. Basically, if one of your servers goes down, how does it affect the business? Are the dead in the water until a replacement server or part can be found, shipped, and installed? If this is unacceptable, then they need to be considering a high-available server cluster, which isn't cheap. For your primary servers I'd recommend Server 2012 Standard. Server 2008 R2 is the most common staple of Windows Server OS out there, but it's being phased out. Server 2012 can do everything 2008 can do and then some, and if this is something that needs to last without modifying or redoing for years, then you need to go with the newer platform to give you the support and flexibility into the future. You can virtualize and even create a cluster environment all from the Server 2012 Standard licensing. A lot of people prefer to set up their virtualization using VMWare, however, and it all comes down to the experience and preference of the person who is going to be setting this up and managing it.
Next, I want to address the network design, as this is going to influence your whole server and network infrastructure. You said you currently have several different departments and they are all behind their own routers? This seems pretty clunky when instead the office should be utilizing VLANs. This can make sharing resources, such as printers and servers, much more feasible. Plus, instead of having to configure and manage each network zone individually at each router, you can configure your whole network from a single router or firewall. I personally use Sonicwall firewalls for this sort of thing, and they have a huge line of different products from small home office firewalls to corporate environments.
If I were doing this project, I would look into setting up one primary network, separated out into VLANs for each department, and utilize a single router/firewall to control the VLANs for ease of network traversal and performance. You can even set up fault-tolerant routers and firewalls in the event your primary unit fails. This firewall would then be connected to gigabit VLAN capable switches for the access layer to each end device. You may also want a separate "core" switch that connects up all your datacenter infrastructure and your access layer switches.
So, we now have the VLANs established, but we need to manage user accounts, access controls, and folder/file sharing access permissions within each of these groups. Without VLANs, you'd pretty much have to set up a physical server in each separate network zone (you referred to them as workgroups) to manage files and users in each separate network. Now, however, we can use our virtualization server cluster to create virtual machines. Basically, we can use one physical server and assign a virtual machine on that physical hardware to each of the VLANs as a domain controller. Much more cost effective! The domain controllers will manage user accounts and file sharing permissions to all the users in that VLAN, but can also be used for authentication to shared resources. For instance, printers, servers, and any other network devices needing to be accessed by multiple departments will be placed into their own "shared" VLAN and network and user access can be allowed to resources from other VLANs as needed without actually allowing the department networks to communicate with each other. You can do the same thing with printer services either with separate virtual machines or includes on the same VM that is your domain controller.
Then we come to storage needs. This is a huge component of your network, and part of it is going to be determined by whether you go with high-availability and a server cluster, which will required shared centralized storage appliances like a SAN (storage area network, not to be confused with NAS) which will store and run your virtual machines. You can then invest in a nice storage server running Storage Server 2012 or similar that will act as your NAS for storing actual user files. You can do periodic backups from this device, of course, but for now start off with a cheap multi-bay NAS device or even external hard drives, and invest the savings into your original NAS to get the best performance and capacity you can for room to grow. There is a huge amount to talk about and determine when it comes to your storage needs, and a lot of that comes down to knowing more details about your business environment. We might be able to give you more detailed recommendations as well with a little more information on your needs.
Finally, don't be afraid to contact some experts. On projects like these I even contact into Dell and HP for consulting and getting pricing information together. It's never going to hurt to contact into their server and storage specialists, go over some information on the project, and see what they recommend and what kind of pricing they will put together for you.
Thanks so much for your help! This has been very useful and sounds much like I am aiming to do. I will definitely contact some of the dell specialists to pick their brains on it.
m
0
l
NickHart
July 4, 2013 7:57:50 AM
Tabris DarkPeace said:
You'd want to be using SFTP or FTPS then to the FTP Server on VPS hosting with a Secured Certificate.While I'll admit that 1 person can mange a network of 50 to 250 with an acceptable level of risk you'll want to sort out all the Active Directory and Group Policy issues well in advance.
The AD's and GP's are one of the things im focusing on most in the planning phase, the server will be installed and managed (hardware) by a third party, but created to our specification. the main reason for this being designed somewhat by us is because of the nature of the company and how the managers havnt been happy with what local firms have offered them. (Which has been bad, even to me it was clear they were trying to milk for money)
m
0
l
I have a very similar situation myself that I have been working to fix for a customer. The difference here is we will be doing the hardware installation, maintenance, everything and every aspect. The problem has been getting the customers to step up and really address the issues instead of just continuing to complain that things aren't working right.
That's why I had some information to help you out, this is similar to configurations that I have been researching for my own project. The main thing is that every business entity and their needs are different so while I might be able to help with the general idea, what fits for one scenario might not perfectly fit another. So yes it's a good thing to get in touch with one of the vendor's server specialist, run through the situation with them in detail, and see what they have to say. I spent nearly two hours on the phone with a server specialist from Dell just the other day discussing options, configurations, performance vs. cost, pretty much anything that could come to mind. Just keep in mind that this isn't going to be a cheap endeavor. The configuration I just priced out was for two cluster node servers with dual six-core Intel processors, a SAS connected SAN device, a separate storage server, a fourth administration and testing server, three UPS systems, rack equipment, and network hardware. And that came to about $40k worth of hardware and software.
That's why I had some information to help you out, this is similar to configurations that I have been researching for my own project. The main thing is that every business entity and their needs are different so while I might be able to help with the general idea, what fits for one scenario might not perfectly fit another. So yes it's a good thing to get in touch with one of the vendor's server specialist, run through the situation with them in detail, and see what they have to say. I spent nearly two hours on the phone with a server specialist from Dell just the other day discussing options, configurations, performance vs. cost, pretty much anything that could come to mind. Just keep in mind that this isn't going to be a cheap endeavor. The configuration I just priced out was for two cluster node servers with dual six-core Intel processors, a SAS connected SAN device, a separate storage server, a fourth administration and testing server, three UPS systems, rack equipment, and network hardware. And that came to about $40k worth of hardware and software.
m
0
l
athornfam2
July 8, 2013 7:11:21 PM
NickHart said:
Hi all, thanks in advance for any comments/help. I am in the fortunate?(maybe unfortunate) position of being charged with the creation and implementation of a new office network and server for a company with a very small but very data heavy office (approx 40 people). The company processes vast amounts of data it gets from its FTP server (this will not be changing) However it currently runs a very old server that is failing, and all desktops apart from 1 or 2 are XP, those not xp have serious issues with losing connection to the server which i beleive is a compatibility issue. I cant get into the current server as it is owned by a company (that does a horrible job) who wont let anyone near it without threatening breach of contract.
My intial plan is to upgrade the desktops and infrastructure of the office to CAT5E and win7 (i realize win8 is a little...different? but this needs to last 5+ years as a system so will windows 7 suffice in terms of the server compatibility with windows 2012 essentials?).
The server i was planning on using is windows essential business server as i am worried windows 2012 essentials (basically SBS) will be too restrictive due to the number of users from what i have read being listed at 25. However i realize that EBS has been discontinued which worries me. I dont want to force CITRIX on the office because for the most part this would be a huge system shock as everyone is comfortable with a windows system.
What i need from the server is, User/work groups (HR/ADMIN/ANALYSIS) that only members of that work group can access. Good security/firewall, ability to implement netop, printing management/restrictions (work groups/designated users cannot print in color or print pictures unless permission granted). Large storage capacity which im planning to use DAS for which backups to a NAS then monthly archives to a second NAS. The workgroups would only have access to different partitions (their designated partitions) of the DAS, with a public "dropbox" type area for inter departmental documents.
It would also be useful to have remote access for users.
The basic outline of data travel is FIELD -> FTP/VPS ->SBS/DAS -> USER ->SBS/DAS
We have software that was developed to work for xp, but does work on win7, which is why i am thinking of win7 with the desktops (that and the win8 UI is a little...unweildy for those further from the bleeding edge of software).
Any reccomendations or problems you guys can see with this? All productive comments are welcome!
P.S. We would be having a contractor install the system and i would manage it, i am not a networking professional simply the most apt at IT in the office, although i do understand hardware well.
EDIT: hiring a consultant is not an option due to red tape/parent company decisions.
EDIT: If you feel something of this is wrong, please dont only point out the issue but also provide some alternative or method that would work better.
With size of the company currently right now I would have to suggest the dell poweredge r720 as your virtual machine server and possible a direct I/O storage or a network SAN. I strongly advise you to upgrade all network switches and routers to Cisco products. Right now it sounds like everyone is all in one building currently so not many routers are need for this setup. I would also suggest a Symantec backup exec utility for the office and a Barracuda box for Virus and spam/ Email archiving. now i can go into more detail depending on a budget limit that would be nice for everyone to know to make the most appropriate suggestions to you. Also if you want to use server 2012 thats more for windows 8 management. i would suggest server 2008 enterprise with SCCM 2010 or 2012
m
0
l
Read discussions in other Business Computing categories
!