IT Employment

General discussion


Servers Split Up?

By med103 ·
My newest client has a network set up with a domain controller,
a web server, a mail server, and a computer hooked up to a
back-up raid all on 4 different machines running SBS 2000. They
have Novell, but don't know what it is running on. All the
workstations are 98 and they have a custom app that runs on
DOS for purchasing etc. In my experience one server has
handled all of the above tasks for a small office. Is there a
reason you would want to separate it? With 2 NIC cards you
could achieve the same thing on one machine right.
Thanks for any thoughts,

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -


by tbragsda In reply to Servers Split Up?

You could, but I would not want to consoliadate just because I could.

Leave a web server as just a web server on a DMZ. A email server... well, that could be combined with file/print depending on size, but again, if on its own, you have more flexibility.

Just guessing, but I would bet the DOS app, file and print are all running off the NW server. They have a win web server, and email.

More details? How many clients etc.

Collapse -

I segregate every chance I get

by jdclyde In reply to Servers Split Up?

This is what I have done to my servers.

I have one that runs our intranet and internal postings and file transfers.

I have one (on the DMZ) for the web server.

I have another (on the DMZ) for e-mail.

I have another on the lan for in-house programs.

If I have to work on any one of them I only disrupt one fifth of the computer services I provide. I don't lose everything because a single server pukes out.

Also, if a server gets compromised, only a portion of the network is compromised and is easier to contain.

The other think I like is I don't have one service running slowly because another service is compiling a report or something.

Just my humble opinion, but it works for me.

Collapse -


by med103 In reply to I segregate every chance ...

Thanks guys, I figured it was the don't keep your eggs in one
basket philosophy at work. It is a real small shop of 5-7 users
that used to have a full time IT guy and are now having
computer issues. They was to upgrade to XP, but they have this
DOS app really embedded in their business. Since they don't
want someone around I almost think it would be easier for them
to put their site out to an external hosting service to get rid of
one more thing for them to maintain. As far as the email and
DC, I think they could be combined with such a small shop, but
perhaps I am wrong. Any more thoughts?

Collapse -

Another advantage of segrigating

by jdclyde In reply to Thanks

IBM has low end servers in their Xseries for under $500 US that most apps can run on as long as there aren't too many.

Web sites and e-mail. For a small shop without an IT guy to handle it I would say have someone else host it.

They wouldn't have to worry about maintaining the server, or having their bandwitdh sucked up with people accessing their site.

Many ISP's will handle the 5 to 7 e-mails, usually bought in groups of 5's and 10's.

If they put mail on the same server is the dos app, then they will have to maintain it. Can they do that or will you get a call everytime you turn around?

Get it hosted.

Collapse -


by tbragsda In reply to Another advantage of segr ...

Host the email/web with someone. Cost per year will be less than... well one trip from you.


Collapse -


by med103 In reply to agreed...

That's exactly what I was thinking. They don't want a full-time guy and the ease of not having all the extra equipment to maintain seems like it would work best for these people. It's funny though how many "ancient" servers are left over from the tech boom, not maintained (jungle (cords) growing all over them) and then left for dead. Many of these companies never needed this much tech, but jumped on when it was the thing to do.
Thanks again,

Related Discussions

Related Forums