CONTROLER LAN PORT setup?

FatRakoon · 22 Sep 2016 at 10:20

I am a total dork when it comes to setting up a true server, although I have a seriously massive network for home use, for some strange reason.

Anyway, I have been toying with a few various options with my server, but I have not settled into a fixed way to do things, and there are reasons behind this, but the end result will hopefully be, this :-

Internet/phone line -> modem -> SERVER -> Router - Switch -> THE PCS

Dunno if the router and the Server can be switched around, but tests didnt seem to make any difference?

Anyway, my Server has 3 LAN ports... One is connected to the MODEM and the other is connected to the ROUTER, and this will allow the server a level of control altho0ugh I dont know what as of yet, other than it dont work if the server is powered off.

Right now the server is working just like any other PC and it is NOT inloine as I showed, but rather assimply one of the PCs.

I am in an experimental stage of bootins and installing from the server and I seem to be on the right tracks ,but I am alsop failing, so... LOL to that

Now, this third LAN port is a controler port... I have connected a laptop to it. and I have been able to open up the server this way and it has been a bit funky, but can I simply add this LAN port to the normal network on the Switch? I accept that any pc could access it, but thats not an issue... The issue is.... is it safe to do that?

I am assuming it id for direct control, but surely for remote access, they cannot expect to have a whole LAN cable extra just for that one use surely, so it must be accessible through the one cable?

ov_sjo · 22 Sep 2016 at 10:23

BattFink · 22 Sep 2016 at 11:40

What exactly are you trying to achieve? (i.e. what OS is the server running, what services are you planning to run on it)

From what I can make out... I'd personally keep the server behind the router, you're opening yourself up too much by exposing the server to the public internet, your much better off using the firewall built into the router to expose only the ports that you want to expose

FatRakoon · 22 Sep 2016 at 12:00

BattFink said:
What exactly are you trying to achieve?

I really dont honestly know... I am purely toying with the thing right now.
I honestly only bought it purely for the sheer number of cores I would have to play with, and that it is purely a toy, nothing else, but since it cost so much, and as a desktop,. it has proven to be a total failure, I am now trying out verious server duties, to both learn and have fun. It is NOTHING seriuous.

BattFink said:
(i.e. what OS is the server running, what services are you planning to run on it)

I have Windows Server 2008 64 bit and I have also got 5 CALs.
Right now as we speak however, it is running Ubuntu Server 16.04 and I am toying with that...And liking it a whole lot.

What I have done, is simply installed each t oa different HD and rther than dual booting as-such, I simplt connect the right drive for Windows or Linux an the data drives are still all currently NAS anyway, and the plan is that I will eventualyl buy new Drives to completely replace the NAS drives and use just the server in the end.

Now on to what it does right now, is simply a file server... that is simple enough and does not even require a server, but LINUX or WINDOWS, tahts a sorted thing.

What I would like to do is this :-

To have it setup, so that I can have any given PC look for its HD and boot from that HD, but if not, then it looks on the LAN and then boots from the LAN, so that it can then continue, and run the installation program of Windows, from the LAN.

I did try this sometime in tyhe past, and I almost got onto the right area, but I am in and out of hospital and I am on extremely strong mewdication and so my head goes wawa every few hours, and I just gave up on it.

I am nearing the end of my current situation and I hope to be on less drugs and so its time to gather some info and give it another shot before I go back into hospital for my next set of operations.

BattFink said:
From what I can make out... I'd personally keep the server behind the router, you're opening yourself up too much by exposing the server to the public internet, your much better off using the firewall built into the router to expose only the ports that you want to expose

Ah yeah, of course.

The Modem is a Vodafone one.
The Router is an ASUS RT66 thingy
These both have their Firewalls enabled

I was also considering splashing out on a decent software router especially for the server too, but only thinking...

I will put the server behind it from now on though.

Semple · 22 Sep 2016 at 13:16

FatRakoon said:
What I would like to do is this :-

To have it setup, so that I can have any given PC look for its HD and boot from that HD, but if not, then it looks on the LAN and then boots from the LAN, so that it can then continue, and run the installation program of Windows, from the LAN.

Sounds to me like you want some kind of pXe setup.

pXe is a bit overkill in a home environment though, do you have a lot of devices that you plan on booting to from across the network?

FatRakoon · 22 Sep 2016 at 16:13

PXE:
Oh absolutely its overkill, but at the same time, it is an option, and a viable one too!

For example, I am a complete spaz when it comes to my PCs. I have a hoarder mentality and I hate getting rid of anything, and because of this, I have a fairly metal collection of PCs.

So much so, that I have converted my Attic into a LAN room purely for myself, I have also extended the house and instead of the conservatory that the missus would have liked, I build a huge Game room where I have a full on gaming LAN setup. If the wife wanst a conservatory, then maybe next house honey LOL. But then coupled with this the incredibly sad fact that I have a PC in every room in the house ( and yes even teh kitchen has a screen and wireless keyboard & built in tr\cker ball purely for if the missus wantsa cooking program or recipe or whatever ( sad but true ) and the only room that does not is the bathroom.
Even worse, is that the Living room is even worse in that I have 2 Media Center PCs, my main PC and my main Linux PC and the Server all in the one room, and all these PCs are all connected up to the network.

I have at this time, got 28 fully setup PCs of various spec, in my home, and so yes, I suppose in a way, setting up PXE would be a viable option, if only for the giggles really.

This does NOT include the dozen or so that are lying about in various states in some rooms.

( and I wonder why I am moving home soon ? )

---

On a more serious note, a perfect solution for me, would be this :-

Server setup and ready to install an O/S onto any PC that requires it.
Lets just say that I boot up this PC and it boots from the LAN and the server starts to plonk Windows 10 onto it, and hey ho, everything goes as it should do!

Now, this PC after installing, needs Windows update XXYYZZ and so it asks the server for it, the server does not have it, and so it downloads it and then sends a copy to this PC. It then storesa copy of that update for future use.

Now, this pc has done a number of said updates and then some time later, I do the very same with that PC.
It does the LAN install and then it looks for update XXYYZZ but this time teh server has a copy stored and so it does not need to download it, and instead, it just sends it straight to THAT PC

we could no on and on, but the end result is, that the server only actually needs to download each update only once, and it dishes out those updates to any PC as they request it, thus droppign the number of times that my setup will need to grab that update down to once rather than a load of times.

This would be much more helpful with Window 8.1 actually because the updates I need for that bugger are close to the 1GB mark and so the option of giving all my PCs a nice fresh install wont be such a huge task and drain on my internet if I could install all my Windows 8.1 machines nd yet only need to download all the updates the once.

Does this seem normal what I have said or is it just a silly dream?

Little_Crow · 23 Sep 2016 at 09:07

Look at WSUS for the updates side of things, it does exactly what you describe.

Semple · 23 Sep 2016 at 09:44

Sounds overly complex and a lot of faff to me.

Would it not be better to consolidate all your gear and have one server and install a hypervisor on it. You could then build up a load of VM's as templates with windows fully updated, and then each time you need to install something new or tweak with it, you just spin up a clone.

FatRakoon · 23 Sep 2016 at 15:35

Little_Crow said:
Look at WSUS for the updates side of things, it does exactly what you describe.

Ok thanks, I will have a look about for that.

Semple said:
Sounds overly complex and a lot of faff to me.

Would it not be better to consolidate all your gear and have one server and install a hypervisor on it. You could then build up a load of VM's as templates with windows fully updated, and then each time you need to install something new or tweak with it, you just spin up a clone.

That still wont do what I want without its own issues.

Clone images dont always work from one machine to another, but even if they do, then I still have the issues of all updates AFTER that, so it would be a solution that soves nothing as far as I can see, while my request can be done, and it requires very minimal downloading and it will sove the issues exactly as I need it to.

I hope? LOL

FatRakoon · 23 Sep 2016 at 15:54

Oh god, yes Windows Server update service... I remember reading about this. Yes thank you, this is EXACTLY what I am after thanks.

Caged · 25 Sep 2016 at 19:56

Throw some crap away, 28 PCs, christ on a bike.

FatRakoon · 25 Sep 2016 at 20:38

Caged said:
Throw some crap away, 28 PCs, christ on a bike.

Bikes exist.
But I know I need to... I just dont want to.

I have given away loads of PCs over the years so I could have had more, much more.

Its like ITX... I just got into building ITX machines and I have gone OTT on those for some stupid reason?

I have a Thermalte mozart case upstairs right... In that, it can take a second PC, but the second PC has to be ITX, andso of course I knock up a basic ITX and so I do it inside a cheapie ITX case, and in my experiments, I find it works as a fairly ok hackintosh, and so I now keep that Setup to be a hackintosh and so I go out and get another setup for the Mozart, but I fall in love with that so much, that it is now my main Linux PC, the Previous Linux PC is my Linux PC too, and so thats simply stored "just in case" and the case that I got for this new Linux PC is a GlobalWin 130 and then I see a white one, and so bugger it, I will knock up another ITX PC, this time its an I3 and bugger me, but this is a much better hackintosh than the other one and this one, is not done with iboot but with clover, and this one's audio and LAN port work perfectly ( ASROCK MOBO ) and, well this is how it is... All because I wanted to simply add one little basic setup into the Thermaltake Mozart TX case... And I now have 6 ITX Machines and I still have nto actualyl sorted one out for the Mozart.

This is how I am? - Its clearly some form of OCD mental issue, and I cannot stop and nor do I want to either!

But, we are moving home sometime in the not too distant future and I have promised the boss, that I will NOT be taking all my PCs with me, and that when we move, I will only take my 10 best and the rest I will give out to family and friends.