Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of Mark Galvin
Mark GalvinFlag for United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

asked on

Using Linux to replace Windows Server 2008 R2 for network drives

Hi experts

I have a client who has asked me the following:
Can we start using Linux for our network drives?
Currently, client is using a Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise SP1 server which hosts their network drives (current total 2.51TB). Using DFS to share them out as '\\domain\shares\xxxxxx'. They are not replicating the data anywhere else.

What they would like to do is host the same data on non Windows OS.

What are the benefits? What are the downsides? Are there pitfalls? Will they still be able to have security and present the drives via GPO?

Thanks
Mark
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Avatar of Lee W, MVP
Lee W, MVP
Flag of United States of America image

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
samba file server will happily work as domain member with file shares.
Windows 2008 R2 allows for 4 VMs for for such a little storage i wouldn't choose the Linux to do the serving...just host a VM that will act as a File Server and off you go...
Avatar of Mark Galvin

ASKER

Hi Lee

No insult taken - never get insulted on EE!

DC's are separate and staying on Windows.

I have explained to them the free Linux licenses are just that. Its the support that will cost. The idea came up during their MS License discussions. They are planning their Server 2016 License purchase for their VMWare hosts and even though I have explained to them that they license the number of physical processors across all hosts (in this case, Server 2016 Datacenter edition, which the way its licensed they can run as many Windows VM's* as they want & so they can move VM loads to Azure). *in which case moving their network drive to linux is pointless.

Thanks
Mark
I agree.

To add (just one more possible) downside: modern file servers speak smb v3.x which is encrypted (given that you use suitable clients [win8/10] that access the shares). You can do the same with samba v3.2, but again, you need to know how to configure it. That said, at the moment, traffic to your server 2008 R2 is not encrypted, either - too old.

On the upside: licensing costs for the server OS and CALs can be saved (unless you own a CAL suite anyway).
"Will they still be able to have security and present the drives via GPO?" - sure.