Re: Co-location or hosted SBS
- From: "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]" <lanwench@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 12:06:05 -0500
In news:%23sYpjonUGHA.4300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
SuperGumby [SBS MVP] <not@xxxxxxxxxxx> typed:
OK, I gotta get involved.
This was a 'crazy idea' I ran past the other SBS MVP's only a short
time ago, and Lanwench is correct, put a TS into the equation and it
seems feasible to me ('cept I don't think the local DC is necessary)
(if they're using TS and Outlook via RPC over HTTP only, I agree --a local
DC is not necessary, but if so, the computers shouldn't be joined to the
domain)
Matter of fact, those PC's in the office can be thin clients, or
maybe XP Home. They either use TS or RDP via RWW to connect to (wait
for it) a TS domain member of SBS running in a virtual machine
environment (both the SBS and TS are virtual machines).
The other MVP's pulled me up on a couple of points:
1) if the office loses internet connection nothing gets done. You
need a 'five nines' internet connection (not common in AU)
2) things like network printers. Difficult to handle in such a
scenario, I started thinking VPNs or maybe 'internet printing' but...
3) People occassionally need to move something large to the server.
eg. I have a real estate office as a client, they rather regularly
need to move photos of premises to the server. You'd want a good fat
pipe (uploadwise) for this.
4) I'm pretty sure there was a point 4,and possibly a point 5, or
greater.
In the right scenario I think it's feasible.
"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<lanwench@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:uUWHjZnUGHA.5884@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In news:5FB8A9E9-69B7-4163-90C4-EF4BEF3CF602@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
ryoun1b <ryoun1b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> typed:
Does anyone have any experience with a company who is currently
using SBS 2003 in a co-location factility where they are using the
services of the server from their office connected via the
internet to a co-location facility?
I would think that the user experience here is lack-luster in that
no-one is on the "LAN" for speeds that most office users are
accustomed to. Also, unless the host is doing all of the
maintenance and backups I don't see the point.
Any comments are appeciated.
In addition to Les' reply -
Hosted Exchange? This can be great.
Hosted file server? Eh. Not unless you're using TS to get to it, and
you'd need a dedicated box for that.
Hosted domain controller? Sure, if you also have a local DC/GC on
your LAN(s).
.
- References:
- Re: Co-location or hosted SBS
- From: Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
- Re: Co-location or hosted SBS
- From: SuperGumby [SBS MVP]
- Re: Co-location or hosted SBS
- Prev by Date: Re: Additional SBS server
- Next by Date: Re: DNS servers
- Previous by thread: Re: Co-location or hosted SBS
- Next by thread: Re: Co-location or hosted SBS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
