Is this possible?

A company has 8 departments, 3 of which have sub-departments.

Each department is connected to a fibre backbone.

The company has 150 clients, 2000 Pro and 9x.

They have four 2000 servers, each with 2 9Gb HD, 2 CPU's and 2 Gb RAM. (I know that the servers will require more HD and probably Hardware RAID). I have been given two different pieces of info that I am waiting for confirmation on: 1 says 2000 server and the other say 2000 advanced server.

From these servers the company wants:

AD, DNS, DHCP, WINS, web, e-mail, proxy, and sql.

I know that for redundancy it will be best to have 2 to of everything, but I dont think it will be possible in this situation.

I the company uses NAT instead of a proxy server, that will eliminate one extra server app.

I know that it will be best to cluster the sql and the web servers, (is it a good idea to have sql and web running on the same server? Maybe not unless they have more CPU's and more RAM? If this is done then two of the servers can be used for as a cluster for sql and web). I know that the OS will have to be 2000 advanced for this.

Is it good for the two dc's to be dhcp, dns and wins as well? It sems quite a small company so I do not think there will be that much work load.

On the design side, as there are only a limited amount of servers, I believe that there can only be one domain. Do you have to have a site as well? If so there can only be one site. I was thinking that each department will be an OU, and that the ones with sub-departments I could nest other OU's for this. I think only one global catalog server will be required and there is no need for replication as everything is in the same place.

Can anyone give me an insight to this problem, saying what will and will not work and to say that if it is at all possible. Maybe the company will have to cancel some requests, like the web server and e-mail server. Will they need to use exchange server or will IIS be ok? Any comments on this is most welcome. I am try to help out but I am on the other side of the globe, so I have no live contact myself and am having to just use Q&A's to the company.

__________________
If it's not written down, then it never happened!

Report this post to a moderator

First, Set 2 DC`s up.Have one hold the Global catalog.I would use one for Authentication and one for fail over.You want to have as little else as possible on the root DC.Do your main DNS on the Other box.

Current disk space available is paltry

Email solution-out of my realm of exp

I would build a Linux box for the DHCP and WINS.This will be solid,inexpensive and require little maintenence.

I dont think i would cluster sql with a web server.IIS is very vunerable and requires a lot of administration.Just dedicate a box to Sql and One to IIS.Still i do beleive in redundancy.It could work.

Report this post to a moderator

Need to take a look at what will cause performance hits. Back to basics:

Processor
RAM
Disk
Network

Agree completely with TW2001 on DC/AD/GC, and can't argue with the Linux box either for the low overhead.(Second your DNS)
With your apps, you need to look at what kind of resources they are going to chew. How much mail runs (what mail services do they want (collab apps,etc), how many sql apps are going, and how much do they actually interact, what kind of web services offered (intra/inter/etc.). Balancing web, mail, & dbs is tough on two servers, but don't try to do it by guess, track down what they will need, then how you can optimize.
One domain definately sufficient, OUs good plan.
If you don't have this information, grab some Jolt, Starbucks Fraps, twinkies, and kiss your wife and kids (send them pix once a week so they remember what you look like when you get home in six months).

__________________
Psydefx
Luck:
Laboring Under Correct Knowledge
-Robert T. Kiyosaki

Report this post to a moderator

Ok guys I have some more info, but it is about the physical side.

Each department is in a different block within 300m on a fibre backbone. No routers but all with switches. Do I need to create a site in the domain to cover this are, and then add all the subnets?

I am trying to get the company to procure more HD and an extra server.

Thank you for all your help so far.

__________________
If it's not written down, then it never happened!

Report this post to a moderator

Do you KNOW they need the extra server? If they use SQL for window dressing, or if they are happy with POP3, or if their traffic is minimal, they may not need it.
Just check throughput so you don't end up with egg on face.
Yeah, one site, multiple subnets, don't accept defaults on the switches, set all your client connectivity to FD@100, Portfast, etc.
Hope it helps.

Cheers!

__________________
Psydefx
Luck:
Laboring Under Correct Knowledge
-Robert T. Kiyosaki

Report this post to a moderator

Sites are used to control replication between Domain Controlers.Primarily to ease the load on network for this task.Workstations will look to the DC in the site they belong to authenticate so that is helpful as well.Realize that sites and services are for the AD replication.

How many subnets?

What is the current addressing scheme?

Where is the location of the NAT router?

Are the switches Layer 3 capable?

Questions,Questions

Report this post to a moderator

Oops??
You need a router if you're going to have separate subnets. (Or at least an RSM in one of the switches). Is this going to be handled by one of the servers or what?
Unless your fibre is like broken, though, you should still be on one site..

__________________
Psydefx
Luck:
Laboring Under Correct Knowledge
-Robert T. Kiyosaki

Report this post to a moderator

quote:

---

Unless your fibre is like broken, though, you should still be on one site..

---

Report this post to a moderator

Hi guys, back again. Well the company is adamant to only have four servers and no money for upgrades. I have informed their SA to try again and to ask for a small UNIX box. Hopefully she will get back to me ASAP. I think next tome I will say no, as this is driving me nuts for the pure fact it isnt feasible for me to see the actual network. There are no routers, and the services they are requesting they are that, a request. They have not got anything like it installed or running yet, so I am at a loss. All I can do is keep asking questions, and hopefully be able to come up with a good plan for her to implement.

__________________
If it's not written down, then it never happened!

Report this post to a moderator

No router, one subnet, one site.
With a router, goes to my questions on throughput. Please let me know if I am still being ambiguous.

__________________
Psydefx
Luck:
Laboring Under Correct Knowledge
-Robert T. Kiyosaki

Report this post to a moderator