Hyper-v or not?

[lumencreative]

So, after some first class advice about which drives to buy for my incoming HP DL380 G8 server, I thought I'd get some advice on the next piece of the puzzle....configuration and backup. I was going to keep these on one thread but by the time I typed out the Configuration question below I decided it was long enough so will make another thread about backup haha.

Configuration
So, our current server (a Dell T320) is configured running Hyper-v on bare metal, and then 2 x Windows Server 2016 Standard vm's on top of that. Not really had many issues with this setup other than sometimes the Windows clients say they can't find the domain controller but this is usually fixed by logging out/logging back in or at worst a full reboot of the client pc.

The server was configured in this manner simply because at the time we implemented it, we needed a domain controller, file server and Sage 50 server, so we bundled the domain controller and file server together as one vm and Sage 50 database on the other vm. We are no longer using Sage 50 so I'm contemplating the following options...

1) A single instance of Windows Server 2016 Std (or even Essentials) on the physical server with no vm/Hyper-v. Both Domain Controller and File Server will run on the one server.

2) A single instance of Windows Server 2016 Std on a vm on top of Hyper-v. Both Domain Controller and File Server will run on the one vm.

3) Stick to two instances of Windows Server 2016 Std on top of Hyper-v. Use one for the Domain Controller and one for File Server.

Is there any real world advantage to separating the DC and File Server?

 

[LizardKing]

Option 3 - Security/segmentation would be your main advantage.
If your security/backup is solid then the risks can be mitigated running them both on the same vm/baremetal (and no offence but if your asking this i'd wager its not ). As you have the licenses its simply not worth the risk imo.

 

[lumencreative]

Option 3 - Security/segmentation would be your main advantage.
If your security/backup is solid then the risks can be mitigated running them both on the same vm/baremetal (and no offence but if your asking this i'd wager its not ). As you have the licenses its simply not worth the risk imo.

Thanks. I’m currently working on the backup solution. I’ve got a free 12 month license for Veeam that I can use so will likely be using that to at least start with. Security is the next thing on my list to research before everything is set up.

 

[Liquidfox]

Thanks. I’m currently working on the backup solution. I’ve got a free 12 month license for Veeam that I can use so will likely be using that to at least start with. Security is the next thing on my list to research before everything is set up.

Combine AD/F&P then run Veeam community edition on the 2nd VM

 

[Armageus]

Depends what you are doing with your file server, but if you have any plans of using dfsr for file shares then best practice is not to run it on a Domain Controller

 

[Conan257]

Not a massive amount of experience, but we run 4 server 2013 VM's on a server 2013 box with hyper-v and failover cluster (so there's 2 boxes like this).

I feel having server 2013 running on the metal box, then having the VM's inside it works nicer than running hyper-v on the bare-metal device. However, we run 2 DC's (1 DC VM on each box), so this may help mitigate against your clients losing the DC occasionally.

 

[LizardKing]

Just to add, dont join your backup server to the domain (ensure it uses separate credentials from your domain credentials!) that way should anything compromise your domain/fileserver your safe in the knowledge access to your restores are not reliant on having a functioning DC

veeam supports win10 so any win10 desktop with sufficient storage should suffice

 

[Hellsmk2]

Option 3 definitely. Keep your dc dedicated as a dc... You'll save yourself a headache at some point without ever realising it.