Migration to new server + Networking question

 hi guys. need advice.

here brief explanation of problem.
we have 4 win2003 standard servers bunch of workstations.
our dhcp server running out of ips.
i created superscope , added subnet , added 2nd subnet router.
router provides vpn , internet access network of 150 people.
everything seems working , devices on both subnets talk each other.

servers use ips 172.17.1.1 172.17.1.4 evertyhing gigabit
router on 172.17.1.254 , running @ 10/100
subnet originaly set 255.255.255.0
after doing tests found transfer rate 1 subnet slower due 10/100 router.

what best way fix problem?
new router ? setup 1 of servers , route using rras? if use rras need set server 2nd gateway ?

part 2 of qestion:

we going replace 4 servers 2 new once
and have 2 other servers total of (4 new servers)

servers 2 way quad core xeon cpus, 4gb of memory 1tb of raid 5 storage on each server.

here current setup , server tasks.

server1: primary dc, dns, dhcp, file server, antivirus server
server2: backup dc, dns, file server
server3: main file server, autocad liscense, db
server4: rdp web, backup server, printe server

currently plan merge server1(server1 + server4) server2(server2 +server3)
then create 2 other servers mirror primery once. 2 backup servers located in different building linked (at 1gb) main network , syncronized daily(maybe more often).

new setup be:

server1: primary dc, dns, dhcp, file server, antivirus server, rdp web, backup server, print server
server2: main file server, autocad liscense, db, internal ftp , www

located in different building:
server3(synced server1):backup dc, dns, dhcp, file server, antivirus server, rdp, backup server, print server
server4(synced server2):backup file server, autocad liscense, db, internal ftp , www

is sound setup ? appreciate tips, ideas gotchas or comments.

thanks.

spinbox said:

our dhcp server running out of ips.
i created superscope , added subnet , added 2nd subnet router.
router provides vpn , internet access network of 150 people.
everything seems working , devices on both subnets talk each other.

servers use ips 172.17.1.1 172.17.1.4 evertyhing gigabit
router on 172.17.1.254 , running @ 10/100
subnet originaly set 255.255.255.0
after doing tests found transfer rate 1 subnet slower due 10/100 router.

what best way fix problem?
new router ? setup 1 of servers , route using rras? if use rras need set server 2nd gateway ?
 
 

the main problem here clients , servers sending packets router, because feel other subnet not part of local network. design.

by changing subnet mask on both subnets can make both subnets part of same network. packets not sent through router.

spinbox said:

we going replace 4 servers 2 new once
and have 2 other servers total of (4 new servers)

servers 2 way quad core xeon cpus, 4gb of memory 1tb of raid 5 storage on each server.

here current setup , server tasks.

server1: primary dc, dns, dhcp, file server, antivirus server
server2: backup dc, dns, file server
server3: main file server, autocad liscense, db
server4: rdp web, backup server, printe server

currently plan merge server1(server1 + server4) server2(server2 +server3)
then create 2 other servers mirror primery once. 2 backup servers located in different building linked (at 1gb) main network , syncronized daily(maybe more often).

new setup be:

server1: primary dc, dns, dhcp, file server, antivirus server, rdp web, backup server, print server
server2: main file server, autocad liscense, db, internal ftp , www

located in different building:
server3(synced server1):backup dc, dns, dhcp, file server, antivirus server, rdp, backup server, print server
server4(synced server2):backup file server, autocad liscense, db, internal ftp , www

is sound setup ? appreciate tips, ideas gotchas or comments.
 
 

the main reason layout your servers way intend it seems provide fallback scenario when building burns down (or worse) without buying additional numbers of servers. (strain on budget, perhaps?)

please @ following best practices:

• provide two domain controllers redundancy (old scenario complies, new scenario doesn't)
• don't install sql server on domain controller (old scenario comples, new scenario doesn't)

perhaps virtualization offers additional fexibility in scenario.

Windows Server  >  Migration