Windows 2000 WAN Design

A T1 would be an overkill for most of the sites, but it kind of depends on your budget and what your users are doing on the Network. At my company, we have about 8 locations in our WAN. It depends on your budget, but for the sites with 10 users, I'dgo with a 128K ISDN line, which connects to your main branch. For the sites with 50 & 70 users, a T1 would be a more realistic connection, you might possibly look at a Fractional T1 for these, because 1.5Mbit/sec might be a overkill, but it depends on what they are doing on the network. Using networked applications, downloading big files and other bandwidth hogs would be good reasons to get a fast connection. Using a T1 at each site will require a lot money, and you can save some budget by going ISDN on the three sites that only have 10 users. Hope this helps you make a decision.

I work for an agency that has 18 offices with between 10 and 100 people in each office. We have standardized on T1 frame-relay lines to each office and it is not necessarily overkill even for the small offices. Traffic levels are typically only a fraction of the bandwidth but it becomes important when pushing out software updates or doing file transfers. We have one office with a 56k frame relay because no T1 facilities are available and we have a miserable time with it.

However, for the offices with 10 people, you could start with a fractional T1 and ramp up as traffic levels suggest a need to do so. As long as you start with 128k or above, no equipment changes are needed to scale up to full T1 speeds.

For a primary line, I would be very, very afraid of ISDN because of the per-minute charges.

paul

It's not windows, it's in your apps traffic the bandwith that should be installed!!!
With a 128Kbps Frame relay you can manage the 70 users if they only use:
1.-a centralized mail with no heavy attach files.(70 users)
2.- Occasionaly some shared folders (5 users)
3.- Not a heavy client server apps (10 users)
4.- Browse the intranet site with a proxy on the branch (10 users)
If your needs match the ones I mentioned, a good start will be a 128kbps line, if you find it too slow, you can double it's speed in a few minutes, with a simple telephone call.

Good luck

hello,
I all depends on what you are expecting to have. T1 or FT1 is not the main issue here. That is the bandwidth, this is to be delt with later on. I think what you have to do is to see how far are the different locations. If they are not very far, y not concider the xDSL solution. This way you can manage your own bandwidth and you can upgrade (if appliable) without any external involvement. If I were u, I would concider something that is :
1- Independant of a thrid party (2 certain extend)
2- easy to manage
3- Low cost Vs quality.

Once again, It all depends on what u want to do.
Good luck

Remote sites are always a problem. One of the things that we have done is to sit 2000 DC's at remote sites. We have configured the DC's to replicate AD information and file system information in the evenings so as to allow maximum bandwidth duringbusiness hours for users.
AD allows you to create sites in the tree which spares bandwidth along WAN segments. Everytime you have a router at a remote site, the server behind the router at the remote site should be configured as its own site. Default AD info and DFS can then be scheduled in replication setup.

As far as bandwidth is concerned, there are two maximus in bandwidth anticipation. 1) A server running a replica of an application across a WAN will use less bandwidth than 10 users connecting across a WAN for the same application. 2)Anything you can do to spread out bandwidth utilization is best. Bandwidth is cheaper in the evening, and speed is faster.

My advice is to pay a little more for a few servers now, rather than pay alot for bandwidth over a long time. You should be able to get by with fractional T1's

This question was auto closed due to inactivity