Pros and cons of peer to peer vs domain environment

[Guest]

Hi there,

I'm just after a little advice. I run an Online Access Centre that has 17
computers all connected through a server running Windows Server 2003. Our
governing body that provides our funding has now said that we can't have a
server (reason unknown) and that we should adopt a peer to peer based
environment.

I don't really have much of an understanding of a peer to peer network so
I'm just wanting to know what pros and cons there might be with that type of
network setup compared to a server based domain. It is my understanding that
it would take more work to maintain especially when it comes to deploying
security updates and patches for Windows and Office as currectly the server
does all that in the background with WSUS so little maintenance required.

Any information would be appreciated as it will help me complete my business
case that I'm writing to request that we keep our server based environment. I
hope this all makes sence to someone *laugh*

Thanx heaps in advance,
Dan

 

[Chuck]

Hi there,

I'm just after a little advice. I run an Online Access Centre that has 17
computers all connected through a server running Windows Server 2003. Our
governing body that provides our funding has now said that we can't have a
server (reason unknown) and that we should adopt a peer to peer based
environment.

I don't really have much of an understanding of a peer to peer network so
I'm just wanting to know what pros and cons there might be with that type of
network setup compared to a server based domain. It is my understanding that
it would take more work to maintain especially when it comes to deploying
security updates and patches for Windows and Office as currectly the server
does all that in the background with WSUS so little maintenance required.

Any information would be appreciated as it will help me complete my business
case that I'm writing to request that we keep our server based environment. I
hope this all makes sence to someone *laugh*

Thanx heaps in advance,
Dan

Dan,

To start, be aware that there is no such thing as a non-server based domain. A
domain has to have a server.
<http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/07/windows-networking.html>
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/07/windows-networking.html

So you have a workgroup, with a computer running Server 2003. Or is your
governing body telling you that you can't have Server 2003 either?

If you have a file server, and 17 clients, it almost has to have a server OS
(with an appropriate license - 20 or more clients). A file server running
Windows XP Pro will be limited to 10 simultaneous connections (XP Home to 5).
With 17 computers, you'll have problems.
<http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/07/server-availability-affected-by.html>
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/07/server-availability-affected-by.html

Now, assuming that you do run Server 2003, having a domain will benefit you in 2
ways.
# Security will be way easier to maintain. Both domain policy, and domain based
accounts, are hella easier to maintain on a day to day basis. How are you going
to maintain 17 (or more - are any computers shared? Any employees moving from
computer to computer?) client computers and accounts on both the clients and the
server?
<http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/08/setting-up-domain-or-workgroup-plan.html>
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/08/setting-up-domain-or-workgroup-plan.html
# Browsing (using Network Neighborhood to locate computers) will be way easier
to keep stable, with a domain. So many problems reported in this workgroup are
caused by segmented workgroups. Segmented domains work so much better.
<http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/08/browsing-across-subnets.html>
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/08/browsing-across-subnets.html

IMHO, you have a business case for needing a domain. If you have a computer
with Server 2003, you are almost negligent if you don't use it to its capacity.
IMHO, you need to pressure your governing body to consider the facts.

Please read all of the above articles, and linked articles. Discuss this with
your governing body. And let us know how it works out.

 

[Guest]

Hi Chuck,

Thanx for your reply. Our governing body is now saying that we cannot have a
server at all. We are to remove it and to adopt a peer to peer network
instead. I've already written one business case demonstrating that we have a
need for it and even the computer company that installed the server and
network have said it was a good business case. I'm not sure what the reason
is. It can't be security related as I have a letter of support from the head
technician who set up the server saying that it meets above and beyond
security measures. I just think it's a classic case of people who work in an
IT environment but don't have a clue what they are talking about.

I shall read through all those links you including with your post. Thanx
again for your input. It has really been appreciated.

Cheers,
Dan