Personally I would go the one physical running Hyper-V and two virtual servers splitting the work. Unless you prefer to go the VMware route and do the same. I would take the free version of VMware and save the money. I have never had or heard of any good experiences with running a file/print server on a DC and would avoid that as much as I could. I don't think you would have any great issue with getting both of these to play well as virtuals and depending on the level and licensing of the physical server OS you could even split it to 3 virtuals putting the print server on it's own. Jon > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Servers in remote locations > Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:23:46 -0500 > > I have got a number of servers at remote locations which are currently > serving as RODC and file and print servers. It is time to upgrade the > hardware that they are running on and I am curious with hypervisors and the > technology of today if people think it is of value to replace the existing > servers with servers running 2 separate virtual servers: 1 RODC, DNS, DHCP, > and 1 file & print; or would you run it all as one physical server with all > roles installed? The existing servers are 2008R2 and the new ones will be > 2012. Ideas? > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: > http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected] > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
--- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
