Seeking solution for remote 2-client sites w/no server, no IT staf

Situation:
1. We are a small/mid-size firm, under a single domain.
2. We have a corporate facility where most servers/clients are maintained
with 2 Win2k3 DC's. WINS/DNS servers are also at this location. 2 IT Admin
staff present.
3. We have a secondary office location with a W2K3 DC (w/ WINS, DNS) and a
dozen clients. 1 IT admin staff present.
4. We have 5 "remote" locations (restaurants). 2-3 computers/printers at
each location. NO servers/DC's. Each are connected to the network through
VPN. No IT staff are at the 5 "remote" restaurant locations.
5. Each location has a router, and it's own IP addressing scheme (i.e., for
example - Restaurant 1 - 192.168.0.1, Restaurant 2- 192.168.0.2, etc.)

PROBLEM - if the cable/DSL goes down at the remote restaurants (the ones
without W2K3 servers) - the computers at those sites cannot communicate with
each other to share files/print.

Is there a "best method" W2K3 solution that can allow clients at the remote
offices to communicate, at least with EACH OTHER, until the cable/DSL
connection to the network is restored?

Would setting up (ugh!) LMHOST files at the remote locations work (the
remote locations are already set with static internal IP's - and the static
IP's of the DNS/WINS servers really don't change either.

Any assistance on how to handle our "remote outposts"…on a shoestring budget
that won't allow us to have a DC + a dedicated IT staff member at each
location…would be greatly appreciated!

--
pbrill1

I'm afraid the terms "shoe-string budget" and "proper solution" are not
going to agree.

The proper way would be to have a DC (same Domain) at each location. Arrange
"Sites" in active directory that correspond to the physical sites,..each
respective DC would be in each respective AD Site.

As an alternative you might be able to run the sites as a Workgroup with the
same Name as the Domain. Just move all the effected machines out of the
Domain and into a Workgroup. I'm not sure if that is a perfect solution or
not.

--

Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com


"pbrill1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:730F9012-15EC-4680-9348-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Situation:
> 1. We are a small/mid-size firm, under a single domain.
> 2. We have a corporate facility where most servers/clients are maintained
> with 2 Win2k3 DC's. WINS/DNS servers are also at this location. 2 IT
Admin
> staff present.
> 3. We have a secondary office location with a W2K3 DC (w/ WINS, DNS) and
a
> dozen clients. 1 IT admin staff present.
> 4. We have 5 "remote" locations (restaurants). 2-3 computers/printers at
> each location. NO servers/DC's. Each are connected to the network through
> VPN. No IT staff are at the 5 "remote" restaurant locations.
> 5. Each location has a router, and it's own IP addressing scheme (i.e.,
for
> example - Restaurant 1 - 192.168.0.1, Restaurant 2- 192.168.0.2, etc.)
>
> PROBLEM - if the cable/DSL goes down at the remote restaurants (the ones
> without W2K3 servers) - the computers at those sites cannot communicate
with
> each other to share files/print.
>
> Is there a "best method" W2K3 solution that can allow clients at the
remote
> offices to communicate, at least with EACH OTHER, until the cable/DSL
> connection to the network is restored?
>
> Would setting up (ugh!) LMHOST files at the remote locations work (the
> remote locations are already set with static internal IP's - and the
static
> IP's of the DNS/WINS servers really don't change either.
>
> Any assistance on how to handle our "remote outposts".on a shoestring
budget
> that won't allow us to have a DC + a dedicated IT staff member at each
> location.would be greatly appreciated!
>
> --
> pbrill1

Having DC's at each remote location, serving only 2-3 computers per location
without an IT staff member present, seems like an invitation for network
security disaster. Microsoft even indicates that DC's should not be 'out of
reach' of IT staff members.

It seems unfortunate that there is not a "DC-Lite" to provide limited
services within a local subnet!

"Phillip Windell" wrote:

> I'm afraid the terms "shoe-string budget" and "proper solution" are not
> going to agree.
>
> The proper way would be to have a DC (same Domain) at each location. Arrange
> "Sites" in active directory that correspond to the physical sites,..each
> respective DC would be in each respective AD Site.
>
> As an alternative you might be able to run the sites as a Workgroup with the
> same Name as the Domain. Just move all the effected machines out of the
> Domain and into a Workgroup. I'm not sure if that is a perfect solution or
> not.
>
> --
>
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>
> "pbrill1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:730F9012-15EC-4680-9348-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Situation:
> > 1. We are a small/mid-size firm, under a single domain.
> > 2. We have a corporate facility where most servers/clients are maintained
> > with 2 Win2k3 DC's. WINS/DNS servers are also at this location. 2 IT
> Admin
> > staff present.
> > 3. We have a secondary office location with a W2K3 DC (w/ WINS, DNS) and
> a
> > dozen clients. 1 IT admin staff present.
> > 4. We have 5 "remote" locations (restaurants). 2-3 computers/printers at
> > each location. NO servers/DC's. Each are connected to the network through
> > VPN. No IT staff are at the 5 "remote" restaurant locations.
> > 5. Each location has a router, and it's own IP addressing scheme (i.e.,
> for
> > example - Restaurant 1 - 192.168.0.1, Restaurant 2- 192.168.0.2, etc.)
> >
> > PROBLEM - if the cable/DSL goes down at the remote restaurants (the ones
> > without W2K3 servers) - the computers at those sites cannot communicate
> with
> > each other to share files/print.
> >
> > Is there a "best method" W2K3 solution that can allow clients at the
> remote
> > offices to communicate, at least with EACH OTHER, until the cable/DSL
> > connection to the network is restored?
> >
> > Would setting up (ugh!) LMHOST files at the remote locations work (the
> > remote locations are already set with static internal IP's - and the
> static
> > IP's of the DNS/WINS servers really don't change either.
> >
> > Any assistance on how to handle our "remote outposts".on a shoestring
> budget
> > that won't allow us to have a DC + a dedicated IT staff member at each
> > location.would be greatly appreciated!
> >
> > --
> > pbrill1
>
>
>

I guess the solution then falls on the ISP to have a link for the VPN that
stays up dependably.

Personally I don't see having a DC at each site a big problem. You don't
have to configure every whistle and bell on it, just keep it minimally
configured. Using Remote Desktop will let you manage it perfectly fine over
the VPN. Yes you would lose that if the VPN is down, but if the DC can not
continue for the short time the VPN would be down without having to babysit
it then it probably needs to be thrown out in the alley anyway.

--

Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com


"pbrill1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:068CA8D5-5C1B-476D-B696-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Having DC's at each remote location, serving only 2-3 computers per
location
> without an IT staff member present, seems like an invitation for network
> security disaster. Microsoft even indicates that DC's should not be 'out
of
> reach' of IT staff members.
>
> It seems unfortunate that there is not a "DC-Lite" to provide limited
> services within a local subnet!
>
> "Phillip Windell" wrote:
>
> > I'm afraid the terms "shoe-string budget" and "proper solution" are not
> > going to agree.
> >
> > The proper way would be to have a DC (same Domain) at each location.
Arrange
> > "Sites" in active directory that correspond to the physical sites,..each
> > respective DC would be in each respective AD Site.
> >
> > As an alternative you might be able to run the sites as a Workgroup with
the
> > same Name as the Domain. Just move all the effected machines out of the
> > Domain and into a Workgroup. I'm not sure if that is a perfect solution
or
> > not.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> > www.wandtv.com
> >
> >
> > "pbrill1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:730F9012-15EC-4680-9348-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > Situation:
> > > 1. We are a small/mid-size firm, under a single domain.
> > > 2. We have a corporate facility where most servers/clients are
maintained
> > > with 2 Win2k3 DC's. WINS/DNS servers are also at this location. 2 IT
> > Admin
> > > staff present.
> > > 3. We have a secondary office location with a W2K3 DC (w/ WINS, DNS)
and
> > a
> > > dozen clients. 1 IT admin staff present.
> > > 4. We have 5 "remote" locations (restaurants). 2-3
computers/printers at
> > > each location. NO servers/DC's. Each are connected to the network
through
> > > VPN. No IT staff are at the 5 "remote" restaurant locations.
> > > 5. Each location has a router, and it's own IP addressing scheme
(i.e.,
> > for
> > > example - Restaurant 1 - 192.168.0.1, Restaurant 2- 192.168.0.2, etc.)
> > >
> > > PROBLEM - if the cable/DSL goes down at the remote restaurants (the
ones
> > > without W2K3 servers) - the computers at those sites cannot
communicate
> > with
> > > each other to share files/print.
> > >
> > > Is there a "best method" W2K3 solution that can allow clients at the
> > remote
> > > offices to communicate, at least with EACH OTHER, until the cable/DSL
> > > connection to the network is restored?
> > >
> > > Would setting up (ugh!) LMHOST files at the remote locations work (the
> > > remote locations are already set with static internal IP's - and the
> > static
> > > IP's of the DNS/WINS servers really don't change either.
> > >
> > > Any assistance on how to handle our "remote outposts".on a shoestring
> > budget
> > > that won't allow us to have a DC + a dedicated IT staff member at each
> > > location.would be greatly appreciated!
> > >
> > > --
> > > pbrill1
> >
> >
> >

Thank you for your assistance. It sounds like "locking a DC in a closet" at
each restaurant location may be the way to go, then. By doing so, at least
the clients at each remote location can talk to each other on their side of
the router when the Cable/DSL provider 'goes down' (which doesn't happen
often, but it does happen!)

Well - off to buy more servers and W2K3 server licenses!

Thanks again,

"Phillip Windell" wrote:

> I guess the solution then falls on the ISP to have a link for the VPN that
> stays up dependably.
>
> Personally I don't see having a DC at each site a big problem. You don't
> have to configure every whistle and bell on it, just keep it minimally
> configured. Using Remote Desktop will let you manage it perfectly fine over
> the VPN. Yes you would lose that if the VPN is down, but if the DC can not
> continue for the short time the VPN would be down without having to babysit
> it then it probably needs to be thrown out in the alley anyway.
>
> --
>
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>
> "pbrill1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:068CA8D5-5C1B-476D-B696-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Having DC's at each remote location, serving only 2-3 computers per
> location
> > without an IT staff member present, seems like an invitation for network
> > security disaster. Microsoft even indicates that DC's should not be 'out
> of
> > reach' of IT staff members.
> >
> > It seems unfortunate that there is not a "DC-Lite" to provide limited
> > services within a local subnet!
> >
> > "Phillip Windell" wrote:
> >
> > > I'm afraid the terms "shoe-string budget" and "proper solution" are not
> > > going to agree.
> > >
> > > The proper way would be to have a DC (same Domain) at each location.
> Arrange
> > > "Sites" in active directory that correspond to the physical sites,..each
> > > respective DC would be in each respective AD Site.
> > >
> > > As an alternative you might be able to run the sites as a Workgroup with
> the
> > > same Name as the Domain. Just move all the effected machines out of the
> > > Domain and into a Workgroup. I'm not sure if that is a perfect solution
> or
> > > not.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> > > www.wandtv.com
> > >
> > >
> > > "pbrill1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > > news:730F9012-15EC-4680-9348-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > > Situation:
> > > > 1. We are a small/mid-size firm, under a single domain.
> > > > 2. We have a corporate facility where most servers/clients are
> maintained
> > > > with 2 Win2k3 DC's. WINS/DNS servers are also at this location. 2 IT
> > > Admin
> > > > staff present.
> > > > 3. We have a secondary office location with a W2K3 DC (w/ WINS, DNS)
> and
> > > a
> > > > dozen clients. 1 IT admin staff present.
> > > > 4. We have 5 "remote" locations (restaurants). 2-3
> computers/printers at
> > > > each location. NO servers/DC's. Each are connected to the network
> through
> > > > VPN. No IT staff are at the 5 "remote" restaurant locations.
> > > > 5. Each location has a router, and it's own IP addressing scheme
> (i.e.,
> > > for
> > > > example - Restaurant 1 - 192.168.0.1, Restaurant 2- 192.168.0.2, etc.)
> > > >
> > > > PROBLEM - if the cable/DSL goes down at the remote restaurants (the
> ones
> > > > without W2K3 servers) - the computers at those sites cannot
> communicate
> > > with
> > > > each other to share files/print.
> > > >
> > > > Is there a "best method" W2K3 solution that can allow clients at the
> > > remote
> > > > offices to communicate, at least with EACH OTHER, until the cable/DSL
> > > > connection to the network is restored?
> > > >
> > > > Would setting up (ugh!) LMHOST files at the remote locations work (the
> > > > remote locations are already set with static internal IP's - and the
> > > static
> > > > IP's of the DNS/WINS servers really don't change either.
> > > >
> > > > Any assistance on how to handle our "remote outposts".on a shoestring
> > > budget
> > > > that won't allow us to have a DC + a dedicated IT staff member at each
> > > > location.would be greatly appreciated!
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > pbrill1
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>

"pbrill1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:A6024D35-FA0D-4399-AEFF-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Thank you for your assistance. It sounds like "locking a DC in a closet"
at
> each restaurant location may be the way to go, then.

Sounds good to me ;-)

--

Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com