Windows 2003 server and parallel networks
- From: PeeGee <triessuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 13:02:29 +0100
I have tried a Google groups search, but didn't find (may have
missed?) relevant topics.
I work (part-time) at a nearby (Hampshire, UK) school to maintain the
computer systems and network. I have reasonable knowledge of NT4 and
Win98SE, limited of XP and very little of Win2003 (as yet).
Because of an externally imposed requirement, the 6 year old NT4SP6a
file server (software SCSI RAID1) is being replaced by a Windows 2003
server (hardware SATA RAID1) and the network central core upgraded to
gigabit. For resilience (and after a recent county audit), it was
decided to add a second system in one of the 7 "outbuildings" to give
an element of disaster recovery, with FRS/DFS to keep the two in step,
though the link is only 100FX fibre. The first system was built as
NT4SP6a and promoted to DC, upgraded to Windows 2003 and data
migration will take place in the next few weeks, when I've absorbed
the migration tool "instructions" (there are approx. 1000 user data
areas). The second system may be used as the primary file server for
its building at a later date.
The addition of a gigabit NIC has left a spare 10/100 onboard NIC, so
the thought process went - why not use this for the FRS (there is a
spare 100FX link available to the outbuilding) and remove this load
from the primary network, then also use it for backup to disk as well
(the current full backup to tape takes 8 hours and data storage
capacity is increasing by a factor of 6!). The system hosting the disk
backup (probably acquired to also act as a separate print server) can
then be used to archive to tape without affecting the file servers or
primary network.
Internet access is through a Linux proxy/cache which provides DHCP and
DNS services, so there would be 4 systems with interfaces to the two
physically separate networks.
So, before we start moving ahead, in your opinion
- is the topology a viable (and sensible) solution?
- would the secondary file server be better set up with FRS before or
after data migration (if it matters)? This assumes that the choice
will remain available until the second system is ready!
- would a hardware SATA RAID1 configuration with one drive in a
removable caddy be sensible for the first-line always available latest
backup (so that one drive can be hot-swapped from a "rotation" of
disks for second-line backup and the RAID rebuilt)?
- is it worth considering shadow copy now (the clients are currently
Win98SE) or wait until they are downgraded to XP or not use it at all?
As an extra, has anyone found an equivalent mechanism to
AT 21:00 /every:sunday "del /s /y *.tmp"
to delete all *.tmp files on a partition at regular intervals? The
"/s" option has been removed from the improved commands available
after DOS 5!
Thanks in advance.
PeeGee
--
The reply address is a spam trap. If you need to reply directly, put the UK where it should be - first.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: About batch close(end task) application
- Next by Date: WINS and DNS
- Previous by thread: Re: Error Message that I cant seem to fix " NEC PCI to USB Enhanced Ho
- Next by thread: WINS and DNS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
