Networks

Ask something
Question Locked

Sharepoint or FTP

0 helpful
12 replies

by razz2 1 view

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Hey all,

Wondering if anyone has had this scenario...

Setup...

Client has Sharepoint Services 3.0 setup and running.

They have no FTP servers configured but could.

They have vendors sending them extremely large emails (60-80MB) but
we have exchange set to a 10MB attachment limit. Instead of opening up
the size limit they were thinking of either setting up a site in sharepoint
for client file exchange or an ftp server.

The issue is he does not want anonymous access so with both ftp or
sharepoint he would need to create user accounts for the vendors and
take great care in the lockdown of either. Seems ftp would be easier to
config than try and lock down the needed restrictions for outside
vendors on sharepoint.

Obviously both would require the correct CAL's or an External connector
license.

Which would you choose?

12 replies

by jswentworth

FTP is the more practical choice and the one I personally would choose. Your security concerns are more easily managed with that choice.

by razz2

Yeah, that is what I was going to do do but the client asked
if there was a case to be made for the WSS solution and I
thought no at first, but also thought is was a good
discussion point.

by tony hopkinson

They are vendors.

Fine let them set up servers, you do an FTP get everynow and then.

by jswentworth

That's the worst possible idea. Putting the burden on your clients is NOT the way things work. Also, any solution that results in MORE servers is a less elegant solution.

by razz2

I hope the "you don't get a lot of clients..." is not directed
at me but either way thanks for the input. FTP for vendors
is a common practice but the client requested the WSS
solution if possible and I thought I would bounce the idea
for another point of view for fun even though I was going
ftp with proper licenses.

If I read you correctly then I agree. It is not the vendors
issue. If we need the data then we need to implement the
solution to get it and get the correct tools in our
employees hands.

In this case there would not be more servers as there is a
DMZ'ed public server running IIS that could easily have ftp
added.

Thanks again,

razz

by tony hopkinson

They have vendors who wish to, is what it said.

Therefore I would advise my CLIENTS to put the burden on their VENDORS.

Is that clear enough for you?

by razz2

Tony, thanks for the reply but I work with my vendors, not
against them.

by tony hopkinson

Vendor someone who sell things
Client someone whi buys things off you.

Sell this to your client, tell the vendor to pick up the bill if they want to make a sale.

Then contact these vedors and discuss setting up a communal portal where their clients could access teh stuff they sell.

Get paid twice.

Add it up, cost of maintaining a portal where people can sell you there stuff, versus whatever benefit there is from having it 'instantly' available.

Or have the vendor, you know the guy who wants you to buy something from them, provide the information in a form you can use.

You don't pay people to sell stuff to you!

If your client is providing a service to the vendors as in distributing this information, then an emergeny dash to dictionary for revision of basic terms might be in order.

by jswentworth

That was directed at Tony Hopkinson who was suggesting you force all of your vendors to put up FTP servers which you would then poll. Definitely not the best solution. You've got it right with a good FTP server for them to access.

by razz2

That's what I figured.

I was always confused by IT people who don't get that
they are a customer service department and that their
company's staff are their customers. Staff wants data from
a vendor then you solve their IT problem.

Anyway, Thanks again for taking the time here. It is
always appreciated.

razz

by razz2

Hey Tony,

Thanks for the ideas on this. We have implemented a file
transfer system/script on their web site for this at this
point.

Just as a follow-up, these 'vendors' are not trying to sell
this client anything. Think of it as in construction. The
General Contractor puts out for bid sub-contractor items.
The subs that win the bids are then a critical part of the
building process and data exchange can be critical with
these subs. They are referred to as venders as they are
providing a service, not a physical product, to the general.
In this case the data exchange is critical to the general
getting it's job done and the subs are almost like divisions
of the company for this project.

Anyway, Thanks again for everyone's time.

This discussion is closed to new replies.