Planning Windows 2000 Network

While SBS looks like a great deal, by integrating the most commonly used server packages from MS, you may want to rethink buying SBS for the following reasons:
1. All the SBS applications must be installed on the same server which also must be theDomain Controller.
2. Licensing caps out at 50 users. Since you already have 30 users, that doesn't leave you a lot of room for growth. The only way to grow beyond that 50-user cap is to purchase the stand-alone versions of each server package.3. SBS (and Exchange 2000 as included with SBS) cannot be installed as part of a larger Active Directory (or Exchange) organization.

Having said that, if you don't forsee any large-scale business growth for the foreseeable future (or any merger possibilities), and if you don't mind having all your apps running on one server (the hardware configuration you mention above is plenty robust to handle that), SBS may in fact meet your needs. I would recommend installing a second server as an additional Domain Controller from the standpoint of "best practices," although it is NOT absolutely necessary. If you do choose to do this, you can use a standard version of Win2K server.

I do see how SBS would be an option, but I've never used it in an environment as large as yours. Given Tim's reference to limited growth opportunities, the licensing would either cost you a lot more money down the road OR limit your growth. I'd assume the first is what would be more likely to happen.

You're probably not going to buy a new server or any additional servers for 4-7 more years, so this would implicate that you'll probably grow past the 50 CAL limit on SBS. I'm also not a firm believer in putting all your services on one server, regardless of hardware, esp when it comes to domain controller + DB + Exchange... That's a lot of hay to pull behind that horse!

Given your scenario, I would use the old server for your PDC, use the 2nd server for a BDC & service server. Then purchase the individual software packages you need. This will give you the growth you aren't able to see right now. Purchase enough licenses for your current users, but this model allows you to add additional functionality & additional users easily. You'll also have the logon redundancy for users to get logged on...

One last thing to cover is to make SURE you have at least 3 drives - in a RAID5 array. Since you don't have additional servers to cluster with, you'll need to keep uptime in mind. Add that extra drive for $400 to ensure if a drive fails, you'll stay running.

But wouldn't you be better off waiting till next month when 2003 becomes available as it has some better features than 2000 as well as a longer life expency from Microsoft. As previously stated you are looking at a 5-7 year use of this equiptment and Windows only has a 5 year life support from MS so I wait the few extra weeks for the new Windows as it will give you a longer operating life without the need to upgrade/mirgrate in a few years. Bear in mind the 2000 is already over 2 years old and will only be supported for another 3 years or so and the mirgration to 2003 will cause a lot of pain and sleepless nights so I'd wait. Also as we don't know what will follow 2003 there could be a very big problem trying to mirgrate to whatever Microsoft produce in the future.

This will work, but for much less you could run linux on an old box & use the software packaged with most distro's or else even use an old box, as Lord Infidel pointed out, with bbiagent and get the necessary linux and firewall\router software for 36$ US. Then you have no expensive licensing issues and can use the 2k box to run exchange on.

It's just an idea. :)

A PIX 501 firewall costs just $400, I think that's as much as a PC, and having a PC on the network as the NAT box doesn't truly supply a layer 3 security device... It routes, but only a true layer 3 device can really supply what you need in security.