MS 2003 FTP server-2

100 pts.
Tags:
Access control
Availability
Bandwidth
Browsers
Desktops
DHCP
DNS
filtering
Management
Microsoft Windows
Networking
Networking services
OS
Security
Servers
SQL Server
SSL/TLS
Web security
Hi, I have several sites accessing applications to download them, like MS office or Antivirus Applications, from the main site. I would like to set up a MS 2003 FTP server in the main site and give authenticated access to remote sites accordingly. I would like to know if there is a way to limit the bandwidth each user consumes per session. Also, if it is possible to just allow the users to install the application directly from the FTP site but not copy the executable files to another location Thank You
ASKED: September 4, 2006  1:14 AM
UPDATED: September 5, 2006  8:34 AM

Answer Wiki

Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.

hello threre. I think that you really need to consider what you want to do with using ftp. My approach with this type of service that you intend to provide is to keep local copies on your remote sites for application installation, patches and windows updates instea of using the precious wan bandwith. The new update microsoft free windows update system allows you to setup remote agents.
Julio

Discuss This Question: 2  Replies

 
There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.
Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.
Send me notifications when members answer or reply to this question.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy
  • GeekDaddy665
    The way we do it where I work is we have one shared mapped drive with our common apps on it - the tech goes to the shared drive (using enterprise server 2003, btw) and do the installs from there - with only read permissions set on the files. FTP is a cool idea and all, but seems to me to be a ham-handed way of getting the job done. Just my $.02...
    0 pointsBadges:
    report
  • BurlyHart
    I agree with previous answer to keep your files located at the remote sites and save costly bandwidth, but if you can't, I limit my bandwidth at the router. If you don't have a router in front of the server, then use Windows routing and remote access. I've never done it using windows routing, but since it will function as a router, the capability is there. Bruce
    0 pointsBadges:
    report

Forgot Password

No problem! Submit your e-mail address below. We'll send you an e-mail containing your password.

Your password has been sent to:

To follow this tag...

There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Thanks! We'll email you when relevant content is added and updated.

Following