0

In a bid to minimise hardware complexity and overall cost for the small network I look after, I'd like to know how best to get DirectAccess up and running as simply as possible.

We currently have a single Windows server connected to the internet behind a firewall/router, about 20 office staff, and a further 5-10 'roaming' users. I'd like these roaming users to be able to connect to the office server with the least fuss possible. Looking at DirectAccess, it seems more user-friendly than some previous VPN solutions.

The load on the server would be small compared to large enterprise networks, with only Microsoft Exchange and a few applications running. Assuming the hardware is up to the job, we have a blank-canvas to a certain extent on software - I can obtain new Windows Server 2012 licences, and have the go-ahead to reinstall/upgrade the client machines to Windows 7 Ultimate/Windows 8 Enterprise if need be. However, I'd prefer if we only have one physical server (cost and space restrictions).

The documentation I've found seems to really only apply to larger networks and talks of multiple servers. Ideally, we'd still only have one physical server, but it seems the main barrier is that there is a requirement to have a separate Domain Controller server and DirectAccess server. Perhaps could we make use of virtualised software servers on the same physical server? If so, how?

Could someone direct me, or maybe you know of an official Microsoft guide or some other source, (perhaps a tutorial/diagram) that shows the most basic DirectAccess setup?

Thanks!

boatingcow
  • 111
  • 2
  • Do you currently have AD a and Exchange on the same server, which is exposed to the Internet? – MDMarra Sep 24 '14 at 12:16
  • Basically, yes (SBS 2003) but you can ignore that if you like as I'm happy to rebuild this in whichever way works out best! – boatingcow Sep 24 '14 at 12:18
  • I'd **strongly** recommend against this. You should have at least 4 servers - 2 domain controllers, 1 exchange server, 1 DA server. If you want to virtualize these, that's fine, but understand the risk of doing this on a single box. You should have at least two physical servers. – MDMarra Sep 24 '14 at 12:20
  • As I say, I'm happy to rebuild this as necessary. The existing network is 'fine' with a single box, no virtualisation. Your comments on why 4 servers are better than 2 would be welcome, as would any insight you have to the original question? – boatingcow Sep 24 '14 at 12:22
  • At _minimum_ you should be virtualizing here. This seems blatantly obvious. – Michael Hampton Sep 24 '14 at 16:03

0 Answers0