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

Chris McKeever techjedi at gmail.com
Wed Sep 15 14:58:21 GMT 2004

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 05:58:14 -0500, Dragan Krnic <dkrnic at lycos.com> wrote:
> 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?

but it is quicker - easier !! actually it is neither .. and we
definately know it isnt more powerful

> 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.

I have reservations running production environments in VM sandboxes -
have no experience either way - it just sounds bleeding
edge....although that recommendation does sound intriquing, it will be
a network traffic nightmare for print jobs....

one other key point I forgot to mention is that at the remote sites,
there are laptop users..so if they come in a need a file, having it
local is key - keeping in mind we are running data over a 1/2 T-1

thanks for all the feedback thus far

> 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

More information about the samba mailing list