Top
Main
Shows
Tech
Site Updates
No RSS feeds have been linked to this section.
Adverts
Stuff I am Playing around with

 

Google

(not really working at present as it is indexing the old content)

and finally…

if you want to, and can afford it, no pressure!

ITidiots open forum > Large scale Wireless network

Hi all,

I have a question for the forum which I thought I'd throw out there and see what came back from the forums.

I need to create a large-scale wireless network with a local web server, database servers and a domain controller. I have chosen the network hardware, access points and the like. I am expecting up to 200 clients to be connected - what I want to do is control access to the network. Using something like 802.1x RADIUS or hotspot software.

As I mentioned before, there will be a domain controller, but these 200 clients will not be members of the domain. Can anyone recommend the best way of authenticating clients? Can I authenticate clients against usernames and passwords held in the AD database even though they do not have domain accounts per se?

I shall be running Server 2008 32-bit as the domain controller.

Any experience with this sort of thing greatly appreciated.

February 13, 2010 | Registered CommenterDouger9999

Just sent you some info (2000 is almost same for 2003), hope it helps

February 14, 2010 | Registered CommenterSupernova

Are the servers interacting with each other through the wireless or wired network connections between servers and wireless for the clients?

February 17, 2010 | Registered CommenterJamie

(2000 is almost same for 2003)"

and 2008

Look at Linux as it would cost less, otherwise with windows you'll have to buy CALs

February 17, 2010 | Registered CommenterSupernova

@jamie

I don't think I would ever have wireless as the main connections between servers even in lab....it's just not robust enough and you can't drive as much bandwidth over the air at this time...

For that matter whenever you can have a choice, always pick wired :)

February 18, 2010 | Registered CommenterGreg Fyn

Can someone explain the CALs thing as I've had Windows 2000 servers all the way through to 2008 running virtually and I've never needed a CAL. The 2000/2003 disks are not the trial ones either and I have the install keys for them. I've even had over 10 XP machines connected to them (not all running at once, but you can run XP at about 128MB RAM) and never had to buy CALs.

I know they stand for Client Access Licence, is it something to do with that "Per User" or "Per Computer" choice at installation? It does mention each connection needs a CAL / each computer needs its own CAL...

Also, Linux is getting to be very good. You don't have to go down the free open-source route. You can get SLES (the follow on from netware really) or Red Hat...

February 18, 2010 | Registered CommenterJamie

CALS are indeed Client Access Licences , the rules are different depending on what products you use and versions. Saying that you never needed a CAL is incorrect every server, client and device in a domain needs a licence on top of the product licence to be legal.

I was referring to a CAL as a client in a domain, however, there are licensing options for per user , per cpu and per VM depends on product range. There's also CALs for network services such as exchange, sql etc.

It is quite complex at first that's way there are certifications in licensing, sales and very large companies have or use auditing professionals.

Microsoft has some good PDF downloads for the latest info. 2003 basics are covered in the MCSA/E materials

February 18, 2010 | Registered CommenterSupernova