re: Critique my ideal home network setup

Well I wasn't replying to you. But, considering I deal with routers and servers for a living, I would say I have a "professional" understanding.

ETA: I did forget that windows server does have a feature for routing, but that's not what the OP was even remotely referring to.

What's a windows?

So, your using windows router and remote access feature to route video on your network? Why?

I like the Windows remote access features, want reliable access to particular things on my network when not at home that I'd like more control over than "cloud services" allow.


And, of course, WS is free to me, my router has a busted WAN, and I need a new box with better hardware to deal with the transcoding. Figured I'd knock it all out in one go at a pretty decent price. $258 buys a used HP Proliant DL160 g6. Single PSU, but I trust it just fine for home use purposes, and they're very reliable PSUs. 2x quad-core (no HT, unfortunately) L5520s which are clocked at 2.26 GHz and only pull 60w; they're on the most current server socket, and I've found recently that used Xeon chips go for quite cheap when they still have a lot of life left in them if this ever needs upgrading in the future- that's the deciding factor for not grabbing a g5 DL160 with 2x1TB HDD and 2xXeon L5420s (old 771 socket) for the same price. Even if I were using this thing just as a NAS, that's as cheap as most 4-bay NAS bodies come, but it comes with significantly more capability.

quote:

---

As for this, I still cant find where he said this. Maybe I am reading it wrong.

---

The post you replied to said:

quote:

---

DHCP controls inside of Windows Server are about as good a set of router controls as one could ask for, particularly with regards to the semi-advanced stuff (IP reservations, static IPs, VPN, and port forwarding for accessing the 2nd remote desktop built into Windows Server).

---

I did word it somewhat funny. I should've said "Windows Server router controls are about as good a set as you could ask for, from DHCP all the way through your more complex stuff"

quote:

---

in my defense, it is rarely used for anything anymore

---

It's still very widely used in big networks, especially when downstream switch management is needed and you want to set your scope across multiple switches on multiple subnets.

quote:

---

Why not put the OS on a SSD, and the DATA on a HDD

---

In a 4-bay machine, it's a significant waste of either money or space. Some 1u servers do have another SATA port and space for an internal drive, but either this model doesn't, or I haven't found anywhere suggesting it does. Also, this is a backend solution. Hard drive read/write speed isn't going to be the bottleneck. There will be two other bottlenecks reached first: Throughput, for the actual "serving" which shouldn't actually be reached and then the CPU itself for the hardware encoding then transcoding. This is a machine that's going to be setup and then left to collect dust while it just does what it does, for the most part. SSD response really isn't going to justify the price for its purpose.


The current desktop with the tuner on it that will continue to be the main media capture device has an OS+key app 32GB SSD + 5.2TB of HDD, mainly for media storage but also for a few applications I didn't want to waste precious SSD space on. Once I order the new machine, I'll probably frugally start by deleting all my backups off the 2TB drive in this machine, transferring it to the new box, installing the OS and then making new backups of everything. Then I'll have the 3TB drive (the main media capture drive) in the desktop dump files over in a manageable fashion so the other box can compress the files and have a much more managable file size (again, you can compress to about 10% without noticing much quality loss). Eventually the 3TB drive will be close to empty from the desktop side, with all its files being shoved over and shrunk. I'll probably keep it in the desktop and wait until I've nearly maxed out the 2TB disk before adding in a 4TB drive to the server. Rinse, repeat.


Then, 10 years from now when I decide I have enough media, I will cut cable and live happily ever after.

You're right...I went and read it again. He did outright cement it later on. I was skimming by then. My mistake. However, DHCP =/= router, so I didn't make that initial assumption.

quote:

---

I've seen quite a fair bit of Routing and Remote Access used. I guess I just assumed everyone used them concurrently with their DHCP. I guess the fancier/bigger networks like their fancy Cisco ASAs.

---

I work on many SMBs and have rarely seen RRA. But, thats not to say its not out there. I just haven't seen it much. Most of what I see as far as routers and remote access is Cisco/Sonicwall/Juniper. I personally have a Sonicwall I was given by Dell about a year ago as my firewall/router/DHCP. Would rather have an ASA, but I'll take free.

ETA: I just realized...We are really geeking out this thread. LOL

quote:

---

Sorry if I was a dick earlier, but it's late at night, I was bored, and your comment seemed a bit dickish and I pounced!

---

I was just thinking my initial comment was probably a bit much. I just waited an hour to download something, then it says it failed due to lack of drive space. Then had to wait another hour to get started on what I needed to do in the first place. I was a little pissy. My apologies to the OP.