[CrescendoBEAt]

Today there is a various OS for servers, but the question is which one is better?
Maybe that's depend on scale of environment!?! but what do think about it? Do you prefer to use Windows Server or Linux in large scale?

And actually which one operate better in large scale?

THANX
CrescendoBEAt ::.

[Wyverex]

Hi

I have experience with Novell Netware, Linux and Windows 2003 servers. I only tested in test environments, but my experience with Windows 2003 is the best. It offers the best ease of use and a lot of easy installable features like a Web server, FTP server, Mailserver etc.

The Novell version I tested did not quite have these features (4.1) and Linux did what it was suppose to do, but took me quite some more time to complete. This might simply be because I have much more experience with Windows.

[tarquel]

Server 2003 all the way - the Standard version will suit most (look at the Microsoft website for the differences in versions of 2003) and its stable, looks and feels good, and is so easy to configure (that a blind rabid monkey could set up a DC with ease ), performs multiple tasks efficiently (dependant on amount of load on the server etc).....

...in all - well done MS lol

Linux maybe for webserving - plus sql db - and basic file serving needs, but I prefer 2003 for anything else.

Netware - ......well..... still have a netware 4 server dying here lol trying to remove its usefulness i.e. get the work/modules off it so it can be wiped and/or scrapped.

Regards,
Nath.

[Martin Zugec]

It depends... What kind of server, what for?

I am using ONLY MS servers for intranet and ONLY linux server for DMZ.

[Win2k3EE]

I prefer Win2k3 ('cause I'm a Windows guy). Linux? Yes, a nice solution, but it's too tricky for me.

[CrescendoBEAt]

ok until now everyone decided to use Windows Servers!! so let talk about the infrastructure that can be implement by Microsoft Windows Server.

How do u design ur network infrastructure? How u use the Windows services like AD, DNS, RAS or other in ur network? maybe u first deploy AD and 2 DNS and one for File and print Server?

What do think about infrastructure in large scale?

[Martin Zugec]

Well, first you must divide network to intra and DMZ. In DMZ only Windows stuff is ISA server for Exchange - OWA etc...

In Intra I got divided server with pre-set aliases, for example company ARC have every server with name ARCServer-function_of_server, e.g. ARCServer-Exchange. The "-" symbol is for parsing purposes, e.g. If first token is equal ARCServer, it is in group servers and second token identifies server. If first token is ARC, second is workstation alias. For example ARC-001, ARC-002 etc... I also use different names for locations, for locality Prague is PR-001, PR-002, locality Brno is BR-001, BR-002 etc... So I can use "testing" localities - when I created new script, I can try it first on one locality, e.g. If token 1 not equal to PR, skip.

For another infrastructure, of course I am using AD + DNS, RAS is not implemented (I had callbacks, now I am on VPNs from CheckPoint).

For File&Print servers (and Exchange of course) I am using clusters. I also have deployment server for distribution purposes, in fact I got three - one is data storage, second is production server and last is testing server. When testing server becomes better (performance, stability...), they switch their roles, so I am switching servers every few months.