[Samba] Re: Migrate BACK to WINDOWS -> Talk me out of it QUICK

[rruegner]

Hi,
i see no problem to have
different kinds of servers in one Network, if it makes sense
from the desired needs,
i have serveral Terminal servers and a samba pdc,
in different offices and locations.
I would warn to make a pseudo religios
discussion out of that.
Combine whatever is fitting best to your and the users needs.
for file services i would preffer samba ever.

Regards

Dragan Krnic schrieb:
> I think I'm clear about what this young Jedi knight
> is asking. His conundrum is that he'll end up with
> way too many servers if he implements both a Windows
> Terminal Server and a Samba file and printer server
> on separate machines. Centralizing the Terminal Server
> on a big machine would entail dramatic traffic load on
> his thin 1/2 T-1 wire, even if he leaves one Samba
> server on each site for files and printing. So basically
> he asks: Does it not make more sense to just add file
> and print services to the MS Windows Terminal Servers ?
> 
> And the answer is: Of course, it doesnt!
> You don't wanna be on the wrong side of the Force, 
> do you, Chris?
> 
> The way I see it, Chris should put his w2k3 in a
> vmware sandbox on his quad opteron samba server,
> ideally. Then install some NX magic and live
> happily ever after, with one central Samba server,
> (+ stand-by) subleting a couple of w2k3 avatars 
> under vmware. Or vice versa.
> 
> Let the Force be with you,
> Yoda
> 
> 
>>sorry but i am not clear what is your Question?
>>
>>
>>>Not thinking about migrating back due to issues, 
>>>it is more due to implementation needs and a little 
>>>situation I have been wrestling with for a bit now, 
>>>and would love some feedback
>>>
>>>First a little history:
>>>
>>>We currently have 10 locations connected via a 
>>>dedicated 1/2 T-1. Last year I migrated from a 
>>>WINNT domain to a Samba/LDAP domain. It has been 
>>>running great. Basically did this for license 
>>>reasons as well as reduced administrative horror.
>>>
>>>NOW:
>>>
>>>We have just started to roll out Thinstation 
>>>thin-clients  that are connecting to Win TSRV servers.  
>>>What is being planned is 1 Terminal Server per location.  
>>>This will significantly reduce the adminstrative
>>>nightmare on multiple Windows boxes and centralize it.
>>>However, this is where I start to feel that I am having 
>>>too many servers per location, seeing that the windows 
>>>server could do what the Samba server is doing, 
>>>I am in debate about moving back to windows 
>>>(I have will need to licenses and boxes there anyhows)
>>>
>>>One other option is just ot house a ginormous WIN-TSRV 
>>>at the central location. However, I am afraid of issues 
>>>with printing back to the remote locations 
>>>(pushing large files through the 1/2 T-1 to print).
>>>
>>>A Another option is to remove the samba servers from the 
>>>remote location, and just have a samba PDC with 
>>>authenticating windows tsrv machines. - I dont like this 
>>>option for some reason 
>>>
>>>I really dont want to move away from the SAMBA backend, 
>>>but at the same time dont want to stay with it just because 
>>>I 'like it' and I 'want to'. So I am looking for 
>>>discussion/arguements as to why I should stay with the 
>>>Samba server and a win-tsrv server, as opposed to
>>>just moving to a MS backend.
>>>
>>>Please Obi-won Kenobi, you are our only help! thanks
> 
>