Welcome to ISAserver.org

What do you think of this configuration/topology?

Users viewing this topic: none

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [ISA Server 2004 General ] >> Installation >> What do you think of this configuration/topology?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

What do you think of this configuration/topology? - 12.Jul.2005 10:43:00 AM

dfosbenner

Posts: 116
Joined: 14.Nov.2001
From: Maybrook, NY USA
Status: offline

Presently: 3 sites, each with their own internet access.

MAIN SITE: ISA2K4, 40 users. Web & email server.
REMOTE1: ISA2000, 10 users, no publishing.
REMOTE2: ISA2000, 10 users, no publishing.
All sites are joined with (slow) 128K frame-relay connections.

NEW CONFIG:
- Remove local internet access line and remove ISA2000 from remote sites.
- Replace slow 128K connections with 1MB connections to main site.
- Upgrade main site to 3MB internet access.
- All remote clients access internet through the ISA2K4 at the main site.

The 1MB site connections are via AT&T Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) network, essentially the successor to frame-relay. The site connections and the 3MB internet connection are managed, highly reliable connections.

PROS:
- Only 1 ISA Server license needed instead of three. (The remotes browse and email only, ISA always seemed like overkill there).
- Only 1 hardware server needed instead of three.
- Simplified, easier to manage.

CONS:
- Only one path to the internet instead of 3.

Any thoughts? Anyone doing something similar?

Post #: 1

Featured Links*

RE: What do you think of this configuration/topology? - 12.Jul.2005 12:30:00 PM

isawader

Posts: 420
Joined: 27.Apr.2005
Status: offline

Remember it's not how many servers, it how many processors you have on the server that counts for licensing purposes. So a server with three processors would require three ISA 2004 licenses (3x ~$1500).

(in reply to dfosbenner)

Post #: 2

RE: What do you think of this configuration/topology? - 15.Jul.2005 8:02:00 PM

dfosbenner

Posts: 116
Joined: 14.Nov.2001
From: Maybrook, NY USA
Status: offline

Gotcha on the processors. In the config I proposed above, I would have one server/one processor.

FEEDBACK ANYONE ?? C'mon dang it !

(in reply to dfosbenner)

Post #: 3

RE: What do you think of this configuration/topology? - 17.Jul.2005 7:43:00 AM

tshinder

Posts: 47669
Joined: 10.Jan.2001
From: Texas
Status: online

Hi Dave,

Sounds OK to me. As long as they're terminating from behind the ISA firewall, then you can include all their addresses in the definition of the ISA firewall Network in which they're located.

HTH,
Tom

(in reply to dfosbenner)