Help setting up an office network

[StuartH]

Hi,

Firstly, please forgive me if this is the WRONG forum for this type of question - a swift kick in the *%£$!@ and a pointer as to where I SHOULD ask will send me on my way!!

I'm a web developer, but I'm currently attempting to help out a local charity here in the UK with some basic advice on network setup and costs - they are currently in the process of getting further funding, but obviously as a charity they need to keep those costs at a minimal! I have some experience with basic home networks but none with this type of setup. Here's what we spoke about:

   ------
   SERVER
   ------
    /  \
   /    \
---      ---
PC1      PC2
---      ---
   \    
    \  
 ---------
  General
 Office PC
 ---------
     |
     |
-----------
 Internet

• SERVER: this would run an Access 2003 database application containing stock records (the charity provides low-cost items to those in need) and personal customer/client details. The database would be updated directly on the server PC.
  
• PC1/PC2: these would have read-only access to the database - PC1 in the office admin area and PC2 in the shop. PC1 may also require internet access
  
• General Office PC: PC for general admin tasks, and for some basic graphics manipulation (adding images of current stock to the database)

Questions (all are cost-oriented! :

1. Is this an acceptable setup?
   
2. If so, what type of hardware/software setup should we go for in terms of the server? Are there any specific hardware requirements for a database server, or can we simply use a more-powerful-than-average/average PC (say, 2.4 GHz processor, 256MB of memory, 40 GB Hard Disk, 48 xCD/ CD Rewriter drives, Network card)? Would Win XP Pro be OK or must/should we go for Win2000?
   
3. As far as I can tell PC1 and PC2 above have no REAL need to be particularly powerful, as they are simply admin PCs - PC1 MAY, however, require internet access (through the General Office PC). Would I be correct in thinking that average PCs are necessary here (see above), or could we save a bit more money by buying lower-spec machines? If so, would Windows XP Home edition be OK here or does it have problems running with a server?
   
4. The General Office PC would require internet access AND (possibly) occasional write-access to the server (adding images). How (obviously in basic terms so that a complete network novice like me could understand should we best set this up? Obviously we'd need to set up a firewall between this PC and the internet, but what about between this PC and the database server - would we require another firewall there? I would guess so, but once again, I really don't know...
   
5. Regarding the firewalls (related to [4] above) - would software firewalls be OK (thinking in terms of Sygate/Zone Alarm/etc.) or would it be necessary to go for the hardware route? Again, remembering that pricing is an issue here...

Hopefully I haven't COMPLETELY pi***d off you folks with asking this sort of question - I realise that many of you probably get paid pretty well for this type of request. All we need is a few guidelines or pointers as to network/hardware/software solutions, just to help us not to waste too much money when buying the hardware/software packages!

Cheers! (and if anyone can answer some of these they certainly deserve a pint!)

Stuart

[madscientist]

since you need to connect to the internet (broadband or dial up?) you could get a cheap router with ethernet ports and a firewall for less than £100.

plug all computers into it and they can get full access to eachother and will all have internet access (assuming they all have ethernet cards and you can actually get a cable to them). the firewall will protect all computers from the outside world.

the server depends on how much load it has to handle. if its just a few entries every few minutes from a single computer, it doesnt need to be a massive industrial grade server with a massive raid array. a reasonable speed home computer could probably handle it and do backups to cd-r.

as for the 2 office computers, you said its just admin work so anything more powerful than a typewrite will do. the image manipulation will probably require a usb port for the camera though.

[StuartH]

Thanks for the speedy response, mad scientist!!

Originally posted by madscientist
since you need to connect to the internet (broadband or dial up?) you could get a cheap router with ethernet ports and a firewall for less than £100.

plug all computers into it and they can get full access to eachother and will all have internet access (assuming they all have ethernet cards and you can actually get a cable to them). the firewall will protect all computers from the outside world.

Hey - great idea! Hopefully (and I plan to do my utmost to get them to do this!) they'll go with broadband.

Originally posted by madscientist
the server depends on how much load it has to handle. if its just a few entries every few minutes from a single computer, it doesnt need to be a massive industrial grade server with a massive raid array. a reasonable speed home computer could probably handle it and do backups to cd-r.

That's what I was hoping for! Am I correct in thinking that the only thing we really need to worry about re. the hardware in this server PC, is the size/speed of the hard disk?

Originally posted by madscientist
as for the 2 office computers, you said its just admin work so anything more powerful than a typewrite will do.

Yes, these two PCs only require READ access to the database application for their queries to the server.

As for OSs, would you go for Win 2K or would XP Pro (or even Home!) be OK here?

Once again, thanks for the speedy response!!

cheers,

Stuart

[ecross]

Windows XP Home and XP Pro are client computers. They are not a server operating system. I beleive the operating systems you should get are Windows 2003 Server and XP Pro. The server operating system should have a lot of system specs and more ram and hard drive space is better. I wouldn't go for XP Home since it cannot join a domain.

[StuartH]

Thanks ecross!

My only concern with Win 2003 Server is pricing - the charity is only small and doesn't have a great deal of money to spend! Would Win 2000 be OK here instead?

cheers,

Stuart

[cat5e]

Windows 2003 is very cool, and there is Win2003 for small office. Aka Windows2003SBS.

Windows 2000 Server might be Good too. Take into consideration that it is much easier to set and maintain Win2003 than Win2000server.

However for small office if you do not use Applications that are Server-Client enabled, you would not have to much use of it.

Under such a circumstances if money is tight WinXP peer 2 peer will do.

Example for Network Server Application: Let say that you have an Accounting Department with few people that issue invoices. You keep the Invoicing Software on a server, and the employees access it from their own computers. Every thing concerning invoicing is maintain and saved on the server. Doing so makes sure that every thing is central, and there are no duplications and updating issues. For this type of usage you need special Server accounting software that was written for this purpose and sits on a real server.

[bassman]

Originally posted by StuartH
Thanks ecross!

My only concern with Win 2003 Server is pricing - the charity is only small and doesn't have a great deal of money to spend! Would Win 2000 be OK here instead?

cheers,

Stuart

Don't get a "Server" OS unless you're using what it offers extra; if you can get the database service working (and you should be able to do it without much hassle) on a Win2K Pro, go for it, it's way cheaper...

[ecross]

Windows 2003 Server would be good if you have something like 15 or more computers that you are dealing and managing with a large network. After reading your post again, I have to change my mind. I tend to agree with bassman. However, Access 2003 isn't a server application. It's a client application. You'll need to install it on each workstation. Windows 2000 or Windows XP would be enough for what you are doing.

[StuartH]

Thanks folks for the great responses!!

So, if all 4 PCs (Server, PC1, PC2, General Office) run Win XP Pro and Access 2003, would that be a reasonable interpretation of what we might get away with, or would it be better to have Win 2000 running on all 4?

The charity need a central database that can be updated only at the server PC, and accessed by 2 other PCs (read-only). The General Office PC only needs to send graphics files to the server. If Access is running on the server and PC1 and PC2, can this be achieved?

I realise that this is rather 'small fry' compared to what a lot of you are doing, but as I say, the charity is very small and without a great deal of money!

Once again, thanks guys!

Stuart

[gtaylor]

Also, look into Microsofts various licensing schemes. If memory serves correctly, and the charity is registered, you qualify for discounted software. This should hopefully keep the costs down whatever you go with.

On the actual question, the cheapest way is to go with a peer-to-peer network. I would personally use XP Pro for all the OS's, but 2000 will work as well with the file security you should want on such a system. Don't go for XP Home, as if the charity expands and needs a domain based server later in life, you'll have to replace this with XP Pro. Even the OEM versions are only £20-£30 difference, so it's well worth that look into the future.

If the office outgrows this, then 2k3 server is a great thing IMO, but Longhorn server is only a couple of years away, and it maybe a better bet if you don't outgrow it that soon to wait for that.

[ecross]

Originally posted by StuartH
Regarding the firewalls (related to [4] above) - would software firewalls be OK (thinking in terms of Sygate/Zone Alarm/etc.) or would it be necessary to go for the hardware route? Again, remembering that pricing is an issue here...

When choosing a firewall, it really comes down to a matter of preference. I'm currently using Norton Internet Security. There are many other software firewalls and there are free ones that you can grab. Windows XP has a built-in firewall. It will do a better job in Service Pack 2 (SP2). Sygate, Outpost, and ZoneAlarm are all pretty good ones.

There are two types of firewalls and both have disadvantages and advantages of each. There is hardware and then you have software. Keep in mind that a router with firewall features only block you from incoming connections. That doesn't block outgoing traffic that can be caused by viruses and trojans. You need a software firewall to protect you from both.

Routers with NAT offer a basic protection for all computers on the network. Unlike a router with firewall features, a software firewall will need to be installed on each PC. You can have both and a good combination is better. You won't have any conflicts but you could if you run two software firewalls at once.

[cat5e]

Just echoing Eric’s notion on Firewalls.

For the last few years I used a combo of Routers (NAT Hardware Firewall) and Norton’s NIS (Firewall AV combo).

No complains.

In the last few weeks I applied WinXPS2 ant started to use it as Firewall, and added to it the free (and Excellent) Antivir AV program.

It seems to me that I am protected as well, but getting smoother action since the impact of Antivir on the system is less then NIS.

It is too soon to make a final decision but could be that going with the Firewall in XPSP2 would have few advantages.

More here: Basic Protection for Broadband Internet Installation.

Anti-Virus.

Link to: AntiVir Personal Edition 6.22.09.09

Even if you take all the security precautions mentioned above, there is also the “Junk” that comes embedded in the code of sites that you log to, and since you ask for it will get to your computer regardless of Firewalls.

Free Cleaning Stuff:

Spyware, Adware, Clean and Protect.

Link to: Ad-aware 6.181.

Trojan Scanner

Link to: a² free

So need to use a Router (and one will do it) + Software Firewall + Cleaning programs.