multiple users logging into a server...

S

SarverSystems

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
7,408
I'm not really sure how to ask my questions, so I'll just post what my needs are, and let you guys tell me how to accomplish it.

Customer has a server (soon to be built by me).
Customer has 20-30 users who each need their own folder on the server, only accessible by the user.
Customer will want each user to have access to the server from any desktop on the network, currently only 4, but will expand to 8-16.
Customer will be using Windows Vista Business for the desktops.

I assume I need to run Windows 2000 Server or Windows 2003 Server. I have no clue how to set this up, or even what version to go with.
 
SarverSystems said:
I'm not really sure how to ask my questions, so I'll just post what my needs are, and let you guys tell me how to accomplish it.

Customer has a server (soon to be built by me).
Customer has 20-30 users who each need their own folder on the server, only accessible by the user.
Customer will want each user to have access to the server from any desktop on the network, currently only 4, but will expand to 8-16.
Customer will be using Windows Vista Business for the desktops.

I assume I need to run Windows 2000 Server or Windows 2003 Server. I have no clue how to set this up, or even what version to go with.
Click to expand...

Windows server would certainly help, since it provides a lot of nice management features that would make this a lot easier on you. You may want to look into Small Business Server. If you prefer something ``free'', I am sure that you can set up something in Linux + samba as well.

I guess I am not entirely sure what you are asking.
 
I would think what your looking to do would be to set up a small domain using either server 2003 or Small Business Server. I think SBS would be more straight forward. You create a user for each person you need. Create each user a folder and map it as their H drive or whatever. Change the permission for each folder so that only that specific person has access to it.
 
scotlandrocks said:
I would think what your looking to do would be to set up a small domain using either server 2003 or Small Business Server. I think SBS would be more straight forward. You create a user for each person you need. Create each user a folder and map it as their H drive or whatever. Change the permission for each folder so that only that specific person has access to it.
Click to expand...

That is EXACTLY what I was asking. You nailed it. So Windows 2003 Small Business Server is what I want? Does it look like XP or 98?

Can you provide a link to where I can get something more than 5 clients? This is what I dug up, but I don't know the difference between 5 clients and 5-CAL. Also, what is the difference between those 4 that are shown?
 
SarverSystems said:
That is EXACTLY what I was asking. You nailed it. So Windows 2003 Small Business Server is what I want? Does it look like XP or 98?
Click to expand...

Looks like 2000/ XP, it has lots of wizards and sort of ``holds you hand'' along the way.
If you want to do some research prior, I have found this quite helpful.

SarverSystems said:
Can you provide a link to where I can get something more than 5 clients?
Click to expand...
You can purchase additional CALs (Client access licenses).
 
By the way, in case I didn't mention it clearly enough, the network would look like this:

1 server
4 computers (for now) accessing the server
20 users (for now) using those 4 computers to access the server.

Later on, it will increase to 16 computers, 40 users (thereabouts).
 
SarverSystems said:
I assume I need to run Windows 2000 Server or Windows 2003 Server. I have no clue how to set this up, or even what version to go with.
Click to expand...

No offence, but if you have no clue how to spec and install a server, do you really think it's ethical to take someones money for a service you can't provide?

Maybe you should contract this to someone who knows what they're doing. Installing SBS2003 (with Vista clients) is not something you want to do on your first server installation.
 
Yea sbs2003 would work. You would just need to buy extra cals as you added computers.

Few things to think about.

Do you want it to host email?

If so sbs is a good choice as it comes with exchange

Do you want remote users to log into the server as a terminal server now or in the future?

If so you need to go with windows server std.

How much expansion do you expect over the next few years?

Going from 4 machines to 16-20 is a big jump. Think you may need even more then that in the future? You want to make sure your server will be able to handle reasonable jumps.

Anyway from what you've already said I'd have a pro come in and do it. SBS is not that hard to setup(well windows server isn't in general) but you really need to know what your doing. In the case of vista you have to patch sbs to support it.
 
pigster said:
No offence, but if you have no clue how to spec and install a server, do you really think it's ethical to take someones money for a service you can't provide?

Maybe you should contract this to someone who knows what they're doing. Installing SBS2003 (with Vista clients) is not something you want to do on your first server installation.
Click to expand...

QFT.

MS has released certain updates to address compatibility issues with Vista in SBS networks.
 
This company I am doing this for, is very lenient with me. They do realize I am learning this, and everyone who works there is friends with me before they started there.
 
SarverSystems said:
They do realize I am learning this, and everyone who works there is friends with me before they started there.
Click to expand...

If that's the case, then you should be ok. Remember that they might end up not being friends if you have serious problems in setting this up.

If you're comfortable with setting up OS parameters and configuring stuff, a Windows server is not such a huge stretch. There is definitely a learning curve, but it's not unmanageable for someone who understands the concepts.

You might know this, but allow me to say it anyway:

Remember that the biggest difference between running a true server environment and running a few networked computers is management. Rather than peer-to-peer, you have to emphasize central control This is true whether you're talking about user logins or file access. Peer-to-peer puts too much control in the individual's computer (from a management perspective). Central control on the server puts the responsibility in the hands of the administrator. As long as you keep this focus and avoid shortcuts that you learned from just p-p networked computers, you should be fine.
 
They don't really even NEED a server, but they are pushing me in that direction. The more they bring it up, the more it makes sense to be honest.

So let me ask this, how do I tell the Vista desktops to use the accounts from the server?
 
A few things worth noting:

1) What you are after, as has been mentioned, is a domain environment. Have them buy the software, a server and a workstation. Setup the domain, join the workstation and play with it for a week. This will answer a lot of your questions.

2) At the very least, you will need two servers; Both acting as a domain controller. This is important, to not try to save money by simply having a single server.

3) Backups. I strongly recommend you get something like an LTO drive and tapes, along with whatever backup software you find works best for you ( backup exec is pretty popular, although god alone knows why ). I understand that can be a bit pricy ( lto aint' cheap, neither are the tapes ), but the capacity is good future proof. If you can't convince them to go with that, then DDS is always a cheap alternative. The drives will range from 500-1000 bucks, and the tapes are 10-20 bucks a shot. You won't get the capacity of LTO, but you'll still get a fair amount of space. To start off with, I'd get about 25 tapes + a cleaning cartridge. That way you can follow the standard GFS tape rotation.

DO NOT SKIMP ON THIS. LTO may be out of their range, but dds is not. I can't tell you how many times I've ended up shipping drives off to data recovery specialists because the initial technician didn't setup a backup system. Those places aren't cheap; Think 10s of thousands of dollars.
 
My backup plan:

The server will have dual 400GB SATA drives in mirroring RAID.
The server will do a nightly backup to their 2nd office in another building via VPN. This backup will also be done to a hard drive.
If I put a tape drive in, they'll never change the tape. I can tell you right now, the tape will NEVER be changed. EVER.
 
XOR != OR said:
A few things worth noting:

1) What you are after, as has been mentioned, is a domain environment. Have them buy the software, a server and a workstation. Setup the domain, join the workstation and play with it for a week. This will answer a lot of your questions.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more. Install Win2K3 and activate it. Then make an image before promoting it to a DC. That way you can `play through' the whole process a couple of times. Also use the workstation a lot, think primary system, possibly with multiple user accounts to get used to what you need to worry about.

Aside: RAID1 is not backup.
 
I know it isn't "backup".

Like I said, I plan to do some kind of off-site backup, even if it's just o an unused desktop with a hard drive big enough.
 
Can someone please help me determine how many licenses I need? The wording is kinda confusing to me.
 
SarverSystems said:
Can someone please help me determine how many licenses I need? The wording is kinda confusing to me.
Click to expand...

Generally speaking you'll need to purchase a device CAL for each workstation. Depending on the SKU, SBS comes with 5 CALS which is enough to cover 5 workstations.
 
SarverSystems said:
I know it isn't "backup".

Like I said, I plan to do some kind of off-site backup, even if it's just o an unused desktop with a hard drive big enough.
Click to expand...

I'd still recommend tape due to it's versatility. Regarding your complaint that they would never change the tape, let me pass on some advice; A very important part of your job ( some might say the most important ) is training. You need to train them on the various policies and procedures they will need to maintain their network. Part of that is caring for their data. If they don't care about their data, then what are you doing all this work for?

Drill it into them, and do not relent ( they will thank you later ): Backups are the most critical part of their network maintenance, and they need to give it that sort of priority.
 
Why couldn't we just use 1 tape? If the tape is off-site, do we really need a backup of the backup?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top