Windows Forum

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Using Exchange server as file server

0 helpful
7 replies

by jonathanv_00

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

Can't quite find the correct category for this, so here goes:

Our company is contemplating moving to an Exchange server. (We currently use POP mail from the host of our websites.) The consultants who are helping us with the project have suggested getting a new server that will run Exchange (with OWA) for our corporate email, while also serving as the file server. Any issues with this? It's been suggested by someone else in the company that this constitutes a serious security risk, given that it will be publicly accessible (in order to provide remote access to email via the Web).

The consultant's response is that this is essentially the SBS setup. He's also recommending a PIX firewall. We would VPN between three offices for mail and file sharing.

This machine would serve one other application, a payroll database (small company, 35 employees). We hope to go ahead and start purchasing hardware and software by Friday, so that's more or less my deadline. Thanks in advance for your comments.

7 replies

by joseph moore

IMHO, Exchange is picky. I would not do this.
A single server running Exchange is gonna be under stress, since Exchange is hard on the processor. Plus, users mailboxes are gonna chew up the available drive space, so if you have to compete between mailboxes AND user shared storage directories, your server is gonna run out of space fast.
Is there a security concern? Not necessarily. OWA users can see the Public Store, but that storage area (even more storage!) will NOT make a shared folder storage area visible. These are 2 different things. Public Store and physical file storage are different. So, as long as TCP port 139 is blocked by the PIX firewall, then you will be (reasonable) secure.
But I don't think it is a good idea. If user X moves a 2GB file onto this server, mail processing is gonna slow down, due to the CPU clock cycles needed to write that large file WHILE Exchange is running.

Your company can pick up a cheap low-end machine with a lot of drive space, and make that the file server. You don't need CPU and/or RAM for a file server, but you sure do for Exchange.

by Former member

I pretty much agree with the above comment, but you are a small company & if money is tight is it could be done on one server. A few things to consider:
1. You MUST put mailbox limits in place.
2. Will the company grow much in the next 2-3 years?3. How fast will your data increase in size?

If the answers to 2 & 3 are no/not much, then it would work!

by jonathanv_00

Thanks to all for the comments. For now, we're sticking with the consultant's plan, but we're keeping the payroll info and our local intranet on the NT box. We upped the processor and improved the RAM for the new server, which hopefully won't be under too much stress with 11 local users, plus anoth 25 email accounts. And, we have an extra server purchased late last year that we can use as a file server if this proves to be unworkable.

by greybeard770

I think the answer is yes, but don't. Your Exchange server will be the busiest server in the room. If you have to combine things, let Exchange live on a server by itself. Using another server for file server would be a good move. Putting OWA on another server in your DMZ (you mentioned firewalls) would be another good move. The other two servers may not need to be real powerful, but Exchange will use all the processing power and memory you can give it. The disk space issue of user files and the Exchange store on the same server was a good point too.

by jonathanv_00

I've discovered the drawback to putting OWA on another server is that we would need another Exchange license. Then we're talking some real money for a small company. I'm not thrilled about the cost of CAL licenses for 35 people as it is. But thanks for your comments.

This discussion is closed to new replies.