NAS Info/Help

GCCRepair

GCCRepair

New Member
Reaction score
0
I have a client that is using a PC running Windows server 2003 and he wants to replace it. They are not in a domain and manly use it for storage and they also use it as a FTP client (can’t remember the program off the top of my head). I was thinking of using a NAS instead of building them a new server. I think a server will be over kill for their setup. I have never used or setup a NAS. So basically any info would be great on this. The NAS has to be able to do FTP. If using the NAS FTP would I still have to use a third party program to run it? Also what are some good NAS systems to use? Don’t need a lot of storage but I would like it to have 4 drive bays for future storage and also one that supports RAID. Also it needs to be fast because they have a lot of outside people assessing the FTP all day long and using big files.


Thanks,
Dennis
 
I don't know of a NAS that does FTP, but I'm sure there's a custom linux solution out there on some commercial NAS if you dig enough.

If you go the NAS route, try and find one that also can do automatic backups to another device.

Personally NAS devices scare me when they aren't somehow backed up to a secondary NAS or *something*...

A lot can go wrong with a NAS device. You could have firmware or OS issues, the NIC can die or be blasted by a surge, an internal HDD could die, or the controller could bite it; then where are you?

Best case scenario it is a mirrored RAID NAS and you can take it apart and extract data from one of the drives. Assuming the file system isn't proprietary, then you're screwed. If it's a different RAID setup and the controller goes, then you're screwed.

So personally, I still recommend servers. Maybe I just haven't done enough research on newer NAS devices.

-------

But on another note, have you thought about how are they handling workstation backups, if at all?

A server may still be the best solution if they don't have a backup strategy, and you could score extra billable time setting up a service for them they didn't have before.

If they have less than 10 PCs in the office, I've used WHS in the past for situations like these. Cheaper than a full server OS, good replacement for NAS, and can keep all workstations backed up via the WHS connector software.

More than 10 PCs I've even seen MS recommend dual WHS boxes, but your newer more professional option is Windows SBS 2011 Essentials which does the WHS style workstation backups.

If you're not concerned with workstation backups, then look into Windows Storage Server 2008 R2 which I believe can be found on some...

you guessed it...

NAS devices. It's Windows, so your file system will be NTFS, always a plus for easy data recovery... and it's Windows, so you should be able to setup an FTP service on it. But do the homework before making that assumption if you're buying WSS preinstalled on a specialized NAS device.

Probably not on NAS devices, is Windows Storage Server 2008 R2 Essentials which includes the WHS style workstation backup just like the standard Essentials server.
 
Last edited:
Alot of NAS devices actually have FTP built in as they are often just custom Linux OS's.

What is your budget and storage requirements. You can maybe do a 2 Bay raid 1 NAS in Raid 1 with 1 or 2 external hard drives for backup ideally with something rotated or occasionally archived off site if the data is critical to business continuity.

I have experience with QNAP devices which have FTP as well as standard Windows File Sharing, iSCSI and much more.

Also, you never said why they want to replace the server, is there a specific reason? How many users are there on the network? You may want to consider upgrading to SBS 2011 depending on how their network plans grows.

If you have more specific questions I can answer them for you.
 
Yeah loads of NAS boxes do FTP. Just search on it.

I also agree with the previous posts in asking why they think they need to replace their server. A NAS is just a server with limits at the ned of the day. I use my SBS 2008 server as my "NAS" in that it's got a copy of all my data and my media for home and business on it. Windows Server 2003 is a proven, solid platform that will perform NAS duties and a whole lot more. If they've already own it then maybe it's the best option. There are many, many large and small firms out there running anything from 2 to 20,000 desktops off 2003 server based networks.

But maybe the server is broken?

I've had a recent client who had server problems and given the cost of sorting it out they wanted to know how I'd set up their business with a blank slate. I dare say that would not have included a server given how small they are. But given that they did already have the server paid for I couldn't really justify paying for a NAS and hosted mail etc etc when all that really needed doing was the server OS reinstalling. Now it works just fine.
 
Thx for all the reply’s and sorry I have not replayed sooner (very busy). The 2 main reasons for wanting a new server is there old one is running very low on space and the owner don’t trust it any more so he just wants a new one. They have 8 users in-house and maybe 5 + outside using the FTP. I’m just wanting to get the most cost effective solution for there needs of sharing files (they have everything mapped from server) and using the FTP. For now I would say maybe 2tb storage. It sounds like a server is more recommended then the NAS. All the in-house pc's are running Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit and for the outside people I’m not sure.

Thanks,
Dennis
 
GCCRepair said:
Thx for all the reply’s and sorry I have not replayed sooner (very busy). The 2 main reasons for wanting a new server is there old one is running very low on space and the owner don’t trust it any more so he just wants a new one. They have 8 users in-house and maybe 5 + outside using the FTP. I’m just wanting to get the most cost effective solution for there needs of sharing files (they have everything mapped from server) and using the FTP. For now I would say maybe 2tb storage. It sounds like a server is more recommended then the NAS. All the in-house pc's are running Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit and for the outside people I’m not sure.

Thanks,
Dennis
Click to expand...

Hmm sounds like they would need further planning to fully utilize the server especially if they cant even join to the domain (Win 7 home)

I find FTP great for distributing and storing files and actually work for an online backup/FTP service provider but for sharing its not quite as good. For example, it doesn't handle file locking, opening from the remote location, conflict resolution etc.

In the ideal scenario you would be able to use offline files with server home folder redirection for personal files and maybe a VPN for shared resource drive mapping. Have you looked into something like that?

You should consider that if they are going to be growing in number of users and demand on IT that you ensure your not building them a solution that is going to be unworkable in the near future. If they don't plan on growing too much you may be able to get away with a simple FTP server or a basic file server. As another half-way alternative you can maybe make a compromise by building them a 'server', transfer their Server license if possible, and continue to use it for a central file server and just install an FTP server like FileZilla Server (free) or configure a VPN solution for remote workers even without configuring an active directory setup.
 
Last edited:
Bloogen said:
Hmm sounds like they would need further planning to fully utilize the server especially if they cant even join to the domain (Win 7 home)

I find FTP great for distributing and storing files and actually work for an online backup/FTP service provider but for sharing its not quite as good. For example, it doesn't handle file locking, opening from the remote location, conflict resolution etc.

In the ideal scenario you would be able to use offline files with server home folder redirection for personal files and maybe a VPN for shared resource drive mapping. Have you looked into something like that?

You should consider that if they are going to be growing in number of users and demand on IT that you ensure your not building them a solution that is going to be unworkable in the near future. If they don't plan on growing too much you may be able to get away with a simple FTP server or a basic file server. As another half-way alternative you can maybe make a compromise by building them a 'server', transfer their Server license if possible, and continue to use it for a central file server and just install an FTP server like FileZilla Server (free) or configure a VPN solution for remote workers even without configuring an active directory setup.
Click to expand...

Correct, Thats why i realy do not want to put a server in. Thats why i was thinking of using a NAS. I have to sit down with the owner and see what he realy wants to do. It might be best to just setup a new server as a central file server.
 
Take a look at Egnyte paired with a Netgear ReadyNAS in their office running their Office Local Cloud service.

The service also has built-in FTP functionality, but honestly, with this solution, you won't need it.

-Randy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

thecomputerguy
Receiving large files from external members...
Replies
2
Views
369
thecomputerguy
thecomputerguy
Appletax
[REQUEST] Trouble mapping old D-Link NAS
Replies
17
Views
2K
Diggs
Diggs
HCHTech
Permission Hell
Replies
12
Views
2K
Sky-Knight
Sky-Knight
jogold
Huge Word file
Replies
9
Views
1K
jogold
jogold
HCHTech
Alerts!
Replies
10
Views
1K
Sky-Knight
Sky-Knight
Back
Top