ISA SBS servers using Firewalls?

Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a firewall/router in
front of them?

Just trying to get an idea.

Gary D

Kevin
Sat Aug 09 12:39:10 CDT 2003

All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected between the
DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
Why do you ask?
-kw

"Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a firewall/router in
> front of them?
>
> Just trying to get an idea.
>
> Gary D
>
>

danabeckonline
Sat Aug 09 13:21:13 CDT 2003

Hello Gary,

While I don't have any statistics to provide for you, given what I've seen
on the support side of things there is a decent combination of servers
running just ISA, both ISA and a router, and just a hardware firewall.

Regards,

Dana Becker
Microsoft Small Business Server Support

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.




| All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected between the
| DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
| Why do you ask?
| -kw
|
| "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
| news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| > Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a firewall/router in
| > front of them?
| >
| > Just trying to get an idea.
| >
| > Gary D
| >
| >
|
|
|

Gary
Sat Aug 09 13:58:52 CDT 2003

Kevin,

Having come from a P2P environment a while or so back (a long while now,
lookin back) where a router was a necessary commodity for hooking up
multiple machines I just naturally assumend that I should hook up my SBS
box/network like that as well.

It was suggested today that I just use ISA - IOW remove the router that I do
have in front of it - and then use a switch for extending my internal
subnet.

I also know how much fun I've had with ISA & opening ports in my router. I
also know that I've maxed out persistent port forwarding in a couple of
routers here, one being connected to SBS2003 RC1. Not trying to be off
topic; it's a related problem not specific to OSs.

I wonder if MSN/Windows Messenger would work if it were solely routed thru
ISA... it sure as heck don't work now on either box. Perhaps it would have
simplified some other problems I've encountered along the way.

So under musing, I wonder if those having success with Messenger voice/video
and remote assistance are running pure ISA and no router.

Guess I'm still trying to establish "best practices". To me best practices
are the procedures that work consistently across various hardware/software
and make our life simpler.

Thanks to those who can/want to share.

Gary D



"Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbac@gte.net> wrote in message
news:O9JWl0pXDHA.1640@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected between the
> DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
> Why do you ask?
> -kw
>
> "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a firewall/router in
> > front of them?
> >
> > Just trying to get an idea.
> >
> > Gary D
> >
> >
>
>

Chad
Sat Aug 09 19:58:34 CDT 2003

Hi Gary -

Just as an FYI - Remote Assistance and Messenger Voice/Video doesn't work
behind ISA. It's not so much an ISA issue as a NAT'ing issue. In order for
services like this to work behind a NAT'ing device, the device needs to
support UPnP (which ISA currently does not - although I'm keeping my fingers
crossed that the next version will). I still like using ISA - and if there
is a router in the mix, it's between the external ISA interface & the
internet connection - not on the LAN. I'm not sure if it's my control-freak
nature, my addiction to logs or enjoying the clean distinction between
internal & external - but I've just never like the idea of a router on the
LAN . . . but that is just my personal opinion, of course . . . ;^)

--
Chad A Gross

Lerman's Law of Technology: Any technical problem can be overcome
given enough time and money. Corollary: You are never given enough
time or money.



Gary Dikkema wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> Having come from a P2P environment a while or so back (a long while
> now, lookin back) where a router was a necessary commodity for
> hooking up multiple machines I just naturally assumend that I should
> hook up my SBS box/network like that as well.
>
> It was suggested today that I just use ISA - IOW remove the router
> that I do have in front of it - and then use a switch for extending
> my internal subnet.
>
> I also know how much fun I've had with ISA & opening ports in my
> router. I also know that I've maxed out persistent port forwarding in
> a couple of routers here, one being connected to SBS2003 RC1. Not
> trying to be off topic; it's a related problem not specific to OSs.
>
> I wonder if MSN/Windows Messenger would work if it were solely routed
> thru ISA... it sure as heck don't work now on either box. Perhaps it
> would have simplified some other problems I've encountered along the
> way.
>
> So under musing, I wonder if those having success with Messenger
> voice/video and remote assistance are running pure ISA and no router.
>
> Guess I'm still trying to establish "best practices". To me best
> practices are the procedures that work consistently across various
> hardware/software and make our life simpler.
>
> Thanks to those who can/want to share.
>
> Gary D
>
>
>
> "Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbac@gte.net> wrote in message
> news:O9JWl0pXDHA.1640@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected
>> between the DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
>> Why do you ask?
>> -kw
>>
>> "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
>> news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>> Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a
>>> firewall/router in front of them?
>>>
>>> Just trying to get an idea.
>>>
>>> Gary D

billyw
Sat Aug 09 20:17:49 CDT 2003

chad..

could you explain more why you dont like a router on a lan...
personally never had an issue with them..
just interested to know


"Chad A Gross" <chad.gross@laytonflower.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%23jU%23gptXDHA.2200@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi Gary -
>
> Just as an FYI - Remote Assistance and Messenger Voice/Video doesn't work
> behind ISA. It's not so much an ISA issue as a NAT'ing issue. In order
for
> services like this to work behind a NAT'ing device, the device needs to
> support UPnP (which ISA currently does not - although I'm keeping my
fingers
> crossed that the next version will). I still like using ISA - and if
there
> is a router in the mix, it's between the external ISA interface & the
> internet connection - not on the LAN. I'm not sure if it's my
control-freak
> nature, my addiction to logs or enjoying the clean distinction between
> internal & external - but I've just never like the idea of a router on the
> LAN . . . but that is just my personal opinion, of course . . . ;^)
>
> --
> Chad A Gross
>
> Lerman's Law of Technology: Any technical problem can be overcome
> given enough time and money. Corollary: You are never given enough
> time or money.
>
>
>
> Gary Dikkema wrote:
> > Kevin,
> >
> > Having come from a P2P environment a while or so back (a long while
> > now, lookin back) where a router was a necessary commodity for
> > hooking up multiple machines I just naturally assumend that I should
> > hook up my SBS box/network like that as well.
> >
> > It was suggested today that I just use ISA - IOW remove the router
> > that I do have in front of it - and then use a switch for extending
> > my internal subnet.
> >
> > I also know how much fun I've had with ISA & opening ports in my
> > router. I also know that I've maxed out persistent port forwarding in
> > a couple of routers here, one being connected to SBS2003 RC1. Not
> > trying to be off topic; it's a related problem not specific to OSs.
> >
> > I wonder if MSN/Windows Messenger would work if it were solely routed
> > thru ISA... it sure as heck don't work now on either box. Perhaps it
> > would have simplified some other problems I've encountered along the
> > way.
> >
> > So under musing, I wonder if those having success with Messenger
> > voice/video and remote assistance are running pure ISA and no router.
> >
> > Guess I'm still trying to establish "best practices". To me best
> > practices are the procedures that work consistently across various
> > hardware/software and make our life simpler.
> >
> > Thanks to those who can/want to share.
> >
> > Gary D
> >
> >
> >
> > "Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbac@gte.net> wrote in message
> > news:O9JWl0pXDHA.1640@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >> All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected
> >> between the DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
> >> Why do you ask?
> >> -kw
> >>
> >> "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> >> news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> >>> Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a
> >>> firewall/router in front of them?
> >>>
> >>> Just trying to get an idea.
> >>>
> >>> Gary D
>
>

Susan
Sat Aug 09 21:27:04 CDT 2003

Microsoft Messenger cannot send files threw ISA:
http://www.smallbizserver.net/sbs2000/Microsoft_Messenger_cannot_send_files.aspx

278887 - MSN Messenger Service Cannot Perform File Transfers or Make Voice
Connections Through NAT:
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=278887


Chad A Gross wrote:

> Hi Gary -
>
> Just as an FYI - Remote Assistance and Messenger Voice/Video doesn't work
> behind ISA. It's not so much an ISA issue as a NAT'ing issue. In order for
> services like this to work behind a NAT'ing device, the device needs to
> support UPnP (which ISA currently does not - although I'm keeping my fingers
> crossed that the next version will). I still like using ISA - and if there
> is a router in the mix, it's between the external ISA interface & the
> internet connection - not on the LAN. I'm not sure if it's my control-freak
> nature, my addiction to logs or enjoying the clean distinction between
> internal & external - but I've just never like the idea of a router on the
> LAN . . . but that is just my personal opinion, of course . . . ;^)
>
> --
> Chad A Gross
>
> Lerman's Law of Technology: Any technical problem can be overcome
> given enough time and money. Corollary: You are never given enough
> time or money.
>
> Gary Dikkema wrote:
> > Kevin,
> >
> > Having come from a P2P environment a while or so back (a long while
> > now, lookin back) where a router was a necessary commodity for
> > hooking up multiple machines I just naturally assumend that I should
> > hook up my SBS box/network like that as well.
> >
> > It was suggested today that I just use ISA - IOW remove the router
> > that I do have in front of it - and then use a switch for extending
> > my internal subnet.
> >
> > I also know how much fun I've had with ISA & opening ports in my
> > router. I also know that I've maxed out persistent port forwarding in
> > a couple of routers here, one being connected to SBS2003 RC1. Not
> > trying to be off topic; it's a related problem not specific to OSs.
> >
> > I wonder if MSN/Windows Messenger would work if it were solely routed
> > thru ISA... it sure as heck don't work now on either box. Perhaps it
> > would have simplified some other problems I've encountered along the
> > way.
> >
> > So under musing, I wonder if those having success with Messenger
> > voice/video and remote assistance are running pure ISA and no router.
> >
> > Guess I'm still trying to establish "best practices". To me best
> > practices are the procedures that work consistently across various
> > hardware/software and make our life simpler.
> >
> > Thanks to those who can/want to share.
> >
> > Gary D
> >
> >
> >
> > "Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbac@gte.net> wrote in message
> > news:O9JWl0pXDHA.1640@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >> All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected
> >> between the DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
> >> Why do you ask?
> >> -kw
> >>
> >> "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> >> news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> >>> Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a
> >>> firewall/router in front of them?
> >>>
> >>> Just trying to get an idea.
> >>>
> >>> Gary D

--
"Don't lose sight of security. Security is a state of being, not a
state of budget. He with the most firewalls still does not win.
Put down that honeypot and keep up to date on your patches. Demand
better security from vendors and hold them responsible. Use what
you have, and make sure you know how to use it properly and effectively."
~ Rain Forest Puppy

http://www.wiretrip.net/rfp/txt/evolution.txt

Les
Sat Aug 09 21:56:14 CDT 2003

Then there's pppoe.

Most xdsl services use pppoe AFAIK. This pretty well nessecitates the use of
a pppoe capable device external to the SBS. There are alternatives, but
they're not reliable.

The pppoe client in w2k3 might be better, but I'm not about to even consider
it - most of the routers do a fabulous job of keeping an xdsl connection up
full time.

With cable, it's less of an issue.

The biggest problem with the ~$100~$300 routers are limited port forwarding
(as you mentioned), flaky vpn passthrough and almost no tech support.

Once you get beyond that price point, things get better.

An external router does tend to keep the ISA logs much quieter as well.
That's of some comfort.

I feel, for systems under about 10 to 15 users, where the users are
generally intimately known, and staff turn over is small - ISA is optional
(router is mandatory).

Once you exceed a certain number of users, you don't know them as well, and
turnover tends to increase. Then ISA will show it's true value. Router
optional, but nice to have.

--
Les Connor
------------------
[SBS MVP]



"Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
news:OwVwRgqXDHA.1492@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Kevin,
>
> Having come from a P2P environment a while or so back (a long while now,
> lookin back) where a router was a necessary commodity for hooking up
> multiple machines I just naturally assumend that I should hook up my SBS
> box/network like that as well.
>
> It was suggested today that I just use ISA - IOW remove the router that I
do
> have in front of it - and then use a switch for extending my internal
> subnet.
>
> I also know how much fun I've had with ISA & opening ports in my router. I
> also know that I've maxed out persistent port forwarding in a couple of
> routers here, one being connected to SBS2003 RC1. Not trying to be off
> topic; it's a related problem not specific to OSs.
>
> I wonder if MSN/Windows Messenger would work if it were solely routed thru
> ISA... it sure as heck don't work now on either box. Perhaps it would have
> simplified some other problems I've encountered along the way.
>
> So under musing, I wonder if those having success with Messenger
voice/video
> and remote assistance are running pure ISA and no router.
>
> Guess I'm still trying to establish "best practices". To me best practices
> are the procedures that work consistently across various hardware/software
> and make our life simpler.
>
> Thanks to those who can/want to share.
>
> Gary D
>
>
>
> "Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbac@gte.net> wrote in message
> news:O9JWl0pXDHA.1640@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected between
the
> > DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
> > Why do you ask?
> > -kw
> >
> > "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> > news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a firewall/router
in
> > > front of them?
> > >
> > > Just trying to get an idea.
> > >
> > > Gary D
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Chad
Sun Aug 10 00:24:05 CDT 2003

Hi Billy -

First, a lot of it is what you know & are used to. A clear majority of my
clients are running SBS2k w/ a 2 nic setup - as a result I have the most
experience with this config. Second - I like the idea of layered security -
put a router/firewall in front of the 2nd nic on your SBS running ISA - and
nasties have two separate lines of defense to get through. Third - I like
the control ISA gives me over outbound traffic, thus protecting from trojans
and the like. I have a few clients where outbound internet access needs to
be regulated and monitored, and most basic routers do not provide the
solution that ISA does. Granted, not every client is running SBS, and not
every client is going to splurge for ISA, so I do have sites using their
router on the LAN (as I'm sure just about all of us do) - but I still prefer
ISA, probably because I'm just more comfortable with it.

--
Chad A Gross

Lerman's Law of Technology: Any technical problem can be overcome
given enough time and money. Corollary: You are never given enough
time or money.



billyw wrote:
> chad..
>
> could you explain more why you dont like a router on a lan...
> personally never had an issue with them..
> just interested to know
>
>
> "Chad A Gross" <chad.gross@laytonflower.nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:%23jU%23gptXDHA.2200@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> Hi Gary -
>>
>> Just as an FYI - Remote Assistance and Messenger Voice/Video doesn't
>> work behind ISA. It's not so much an ISA issue as a NAT'ing issue.
>> In order for services like this to work behind a NAT'ing device, the
>> device needs to support UPnP (which ISA currently does not -
>> although I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the next version will).
>> I still like using ISA - and if there is a router in the mix, it's
>> between the external ISA interface & the internet connection - not
>> on the LAN. I'm not sure if it's my control-freak nature, my
>> addiction to logs or enjoying the clean distinction between internal
>> & external - but I've just never like the idea of a router on the
>> LAN . . . but that is just my personal opinion, of course . . . ;^)
>>
>> --
>> Chad A Gross
>>
>> Lerman's Law of Technology: Any technical problem can be overcome
>> given enough time and money. Corollary: You are never given enough
>> time or money.
>>
>>
>>
>> Gary Dikkema wrote:
>>> Kevin,
>>>
>>> Having come from a P2P environment a while or so back (a long while
>>> now, lookin back) where a router was a necessary commodity for
>>> hooking up multiple machines I just naturally assumend that I should
>>> hook up my SBS box/network like that as well.
>>>
>>> It was suggested today that I just use ISA - IOW remove the router
>>> that I do have in front of it - and then use a switch for extending
>>> my internal subnet.
>>>
>>> I also know how much fun I've had with ISA & opening ports in my
>>> router. I also know that I've maxed out persistent port forwarding
>>> in
>>> a couple of routers here, one being connected to SBS2003 RC1. Not
>>> trying to be off topic; it's a related problem not specific to OSs.
>>>
>>> I wonder if MSN/Windows Messenger would work if it were solely
>>> routed thru ISA... it sure as heck don't work now on either box.
>>> Perhaps it would have simplified some other problems I've
>>> encountered along the way.
>>>
>>> So under musing, I wonder if those having success with Messenger
>>> voice/video and remote assistance are running pure ISA and no
>>> router.
>>>
>>> Guess I'm still trying to establish "best practices". To me best
>>> practices are the procedures that work consistently across various
>>> hardware/software and make our life simpler.
>>>
>>> Thanks to those who can/want to share.
>>>
>>> Gary D
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbac@gte.net> wrote in message
>>> news:O9JWl0pXDHA.1640@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>> All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected
>>>> between the DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
>>>> Why do you ask?
>>>> -kw
>>>>
>>>> "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
>>>> news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a
>>>>> firewall/router in front of them?
>>>>>
>>>>> Just trying to get an idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary D

David
Sun Aug 10 00:41:32 CDT 2003

On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 12:21:39 -0500, "Gary Dikkema"
<gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote:

>Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a firewall/router in
>front of them?
>

The server I manage has an integrated ADSL modem/router in front of
it.

Take care,

Dave

SuperGumby
Sun Aug 10 01:10:46 CDT 2003

I can speak for a dozen (or more), all have routers in front (as you may
expect) and the ones that annoy me are the one where the router doesn't do
GRE incoming passthrough so the server is DMZ'd.

"Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a firewall/router in
> front of them?
>
> Just trying to get an idea.
>
> Gary D
>
>

Gary
Sun Aug 17 14:37:07 CDT 2003

PPOE works well once you get away from ISA... normally. Worked well in the
Windows XP P2P world before I went to servers and ISA.

My SBS2003 without ISA and the new router firmware works flawlessly so far.
Haven't tried voice or video yet but remote assistance worked well and it's
usually the one that fails.

Gary D


"Les Connor [SBS MVP]" <les.connor@cfiveDEL.ca> wrote in message
news:ODfn3ruXDHA.2452@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Then there's pppoe.
>
> Most xdsl services use pppoe AFAIK. This pretty well nessecitates the use
of
> a pppoe capable device external to the SBS. There are alternatives, but
> they're not reliable.
>
> The pppoe client in w2k3 might be better, but I'm not about to even
consider
> it - most of the routers do a fabulous job of keeping an xdsl connection
up
> full time.
>
> With cable, it's less of an issue.
>
> The biggest problem with the ~$100~$300 routers are limited port
forwarding
> (as you mentioned), flaky vpn passthrough and almost no tech support.
>
> Once you get beyond that price point, things get better.
>
> An external router does tend to keep the ISA logs much quieter as well.
> That's of some comfort.
>
> I feel, for systems under about 10 to 15 users, where the users are
> generally intimately known, and staff turn over is small - ISA is optional
> (router is mandatory).
>
> Once you exceed a certain number of users, you don't know them as well,
and
> turnover tends to increase. Then ISA will show it's true value. Router
> optional, but nice to have.
>
> --
> Les Connor
> ------------------
> [SBS MVP]
>
>
>
> "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> news:OwVwRgqXDHA.1492@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > Kevin,
> >
> > Having come from a P2P environment a while or so back (a long while now,
> > lookin back) where a router was a necessary commodity for hooking up
> > multiple machines I just naturally assumend that I should hook up my SBS
> > box/network like that as well.
> >
> > It was suggested today that I just use ISA - IOW remove the router that
I
> do
> > have in front of it - and then use a switch for extending my internal
> > subnet.
> >
> > I also know how much fun I've had with ISA & opening ports in my router.
I
> > also know that I've maxed out persistent port forwarding in a couple of
> > routers here, one being connected to SBS2003 RC1. Not trying to be off
> > topic; it's a related problem not specific to OSs.
> >
> > I wonder if MSN/Windows Messenger would work if it were solely routed
thru
> > ISA... it sure as heck don't work now on either box. Perhaps it would
have
> > simplified some other problems I've encountered along the way.
> >
> > So under musing, I wonder if those having success with Messenger
> voice/video
> > and remote assistance are running pure ISA and no router.
> >
> > Guess I'm still trying to establish "best practices". To me best
practices
> > are the procedures that work consistently across various
hardware/software
> > and make our life simpler.
> >
> > Thanks to those who can/want to share.
> >
> > Gary D
> >
> >
> >
> > "Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbac@gte.net> wrote in message
> > news:O9JWl0pXDHA.1640@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected between
> the
> > > DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
> > > Why do you ask?
> > > -kw
> > >
> > > "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > > Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a
firewall/router
> in
> > > > front of them?
> > > >
> > > > Just trying to get an idea.
> > > >
> > > > Gary D
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Les
Sun Aug 17 20:28:45 CDT 2003

Is it still like a *dialup* connection, modeled after pots? (makes the users
feel comfortable, because they are all used to dial-up, says the ISP)

Sorry for not trying it out.

--
Les Connor
------------------
[SBS MVP]



"Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@cdir.ca> wrote in message
news:eQHMzbPZDHA.3248@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> PPOE works well once you get away from ISA... normally. Worked well in the
> Windows XP P2P world before I went to servers and ISA.
>
> My SBS2003 without ISA and the new router firmware works flawlessly so
far.
> Haven't tried voice or video yet but remote assistance worked well and
it's
> usually the one that fails.
>
> Gary D
>
>
> "Les Connor [SBS MVP]" <les.connor@cfiveDEL.ca> wrote in message
> news:ODfn3ruXDHA.2452@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > Then there's pppoe.
> >
> > Most xdsl services use pppoe AFAIK. This pretty well nessecitates the
use
> of
> > a pppoe capable device external to the SBS. There are alternatives, but
> > they're not reliable.
> >
> > The pppoe client in w2k3 might be better, but I'm not about to even
> consider
> > it - most of the routers do a fabulous job of keeping an xdsl connection
> up
> > full time.
> >
> > With cable, it's less of an issue.
> >
> > The biggest problem with the ~$100~$300 routers are limited port
> forwarding
> > (as you mentioned), flaky vpn passthrough and almost no tech support.
> >
> > Once you get beyond that price point, things get better.
> >
> > An external router does tend to keep the ISA logs much quieter as well.
> > That's of some comfort.
> >
> > I feel, for systems under about 10 to 15 users, where the users are
> > generally intimately known, and staff turn over is small - ISA is
optional
> > (router is mandatory).
> >
> > Once you exceed a certain number of users, you don't know them as well,
> and
> > turnover tends to increase. Then ISA will show it's true value. Router
> > optional, but nice to have.
> >
> > --
> > Les Connor
> > ------------------
> > [SBS MVP]
> >
> >
> >
> > "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> > news:OwVwRgqXDHA.1492@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > Kevin,
> > >
> > > Having come from a P2P environment a while or so back (a long while
now,
> > > lookin back) where a router was a necessary commodity for hooking up
> > > multiple machines I just naturally assumend that I should hook up my
SBS
> > > box/network like that as well.
> > >
> > > It was suggested today that I just use ISA - IOW remove the router
that
> I
> > do
> > > have in front of it - and then use a switch for extending my internal
> > > subnet.
> > >
> > > I also know how much fun I've had with ISA & opening ports in my
router.
> I
> > > also know that I've maxed out persistent port forwarding in a couple
of
> > > routers here, one being connected to SBS2003 RC1. Not trying to be off
> > > topic; it's a related problem not specific to OSs.
> > >
> > > I wonder if MSN/Windows Messenger would work if it were solely routed
> thru
> > > ISA... it sure as heck don't work now on either box. Perhaps it would
> have
> > > simplified some other problems I've encountered along the way.
> > >
> > > So under musing, I wonder if those having success with Messenger
> > voice/video
> > > and remote assistance are running pure ISA and no router.
> > >
> > > Guess I'm still trying to establish "best practices". To me best
> practices
> > > are the procedures that work consistently across various
> hardware/software
> > > and make our life simpler.
> > >
> > > Thanks to those who can/want to share.
> > >
> > > Gary D
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbac@gte.net> wrote in message
> > > news:O9JWl0pXDHA.1640@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > > All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected
between
> > the
> > > > DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
> > > > Why do you ask?
> > > > -kw
> > > >
> > > > "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> > > > news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > > > Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a
> firewall/router
> > in
> > > > > front of them?
> > > > >
> > > > > Just trying to get an idea.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary D
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Gary
Mon Aug 18 06:44:32 CDT 2003

I suppose... you create a connectoid, provide account and password info.

But in the WS2003, SBS2003 and WIN XP world it's much like creating a VPN
connectoid isn't it? Still need account, password and domain for VPN and
other connections, don't we?

Give it a whirl, it's a no-brainer.

Gary D


"Les Connor [SBS MVP]" <les.connor@cfiveDEL.ca> wrote in message
news:uGOtSgSZDHA.1128@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Is it still like a *dialup* connection, modeled after pots? (makes the
users
> feel comfortable, because they are all used to dial-up, says the ISP)
>
> Sorry for not trying it out.
>
> --
> Les Connor
> ------------------
> [SBS MVP]
>
>
>
> "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@cdir.ca> wrote in message
> news:eQHMzbPZDHA.3248@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > PPOE works well once you get away from ISA... normally. Worked well in
the
> > Windows XP P2P world before I went to servers and ISA.
> >
> > My SBS2003 without ISA and the new router firmware works flawlessly so
> far.
> > Haven't tried voice or video yet but remote assistance worked well and
> it's
> > usually the one that fails.
> >
> > Gary D
> >
> >
> > "Les Connor [SBS MVP]" <les.connor@cfiveDEL.ca> wrote in message
> > news:ODfn3ruXDHA.2452@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > Then there's pppoe.
> > >
> > > Most xdsl services use pppoe AFAIK. This pretty well nessecitates the
> use
> > of
> > > a pppoe capable device external to the SBS. There are alternatives,
but
> > > they're not reliable.
> > >
> > > The pppoe client in w2k3 might be better, but I'm not about to even
> > consider
> > > it - most of the routers do a fabulous job of keeping an xdsl
connection
> > up
> > > full time.
> > >
> > > With cable, it's less of an issue.
> > >
> > > The biggest problem with the ~$100~$300 routers are limited port
> > forwarding
> > > (as you mentioned), flaky vpn passthrough and almost no tech support.
> > >
> > > Once you get beyond that price point, things get better.
> > >
> > > An external router does tend to keep the ISA logs much quieter as
well.
> > > That's of some comfort.
> > >
> > > I feel, for systems under about 10 to 15 users, where the users are
> > > generally intimately known, and staff turn over is small - ISA is
> optional
> > > (router is mandatory).
> > >
> > > Once you exceed a certain number of users, you don't know them as
well,
> > and
> > > turnover tends to increase. Then ISA will show it's true value. Router
> > > optional, but nice to have.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Les Connor
> > > ------------------
> > > [SBS MVP]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:OwVwRgqXDHA.1492@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > > Kevin,
> > > >
> > > > Having come from a P2P environment a while or so back (a long while
> now,
> > > > lookin back) where a router was a necessary commodity for hooking up
> > > > multiple machines I just naturally assumend that I should hook up my
> SBS
> > > > box/network like that as well.
> > > >
> > > > It was suggested today that I just use ISA - IOW remove the router
> that
> > I
> > > do
> > > > have in front of it - and then use a switch for extending my
internal
> > > > subnet.
> > > >
> > > > I also know how much fun I've had with ISA & opening ports in my
> router.
> > I
> > > > also know that I've maxed out persistent port forwarding in a couple
> of
> > > > routers here, one being connected to SBS2003 RC1. Not trying to be
off
> > > > topic; it's a related problem not specific to OSs.
> > > >
> > > > I wonder if MSN/Windows Messenger would work if it were solely
routed
> > thru
> > > > ISA... it sure as heck don't work now on either box. Perhaps it
would
> > have
> > > > simplified some other problems I've encountered along the way.
> > > >
> > > > So under musing, I wonder if those having success with Messenger
> > > voice/video
> > > > and remote assistance are running pure ISA and no router.
> > > >
> > > > Guess I'm still trying to establish "best practices". To me best
> > practices
> > > > are the procedures that work consistently across various
> > hardware/software
> > > > and make our life simpler.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks to those who can/want to share.
> > > >
> > > > Gary D
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Kevin Weilbacher" <kweilbac@gte.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:O9JWl0pXDHA.1640@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > > > All my servers have something like a Linksys BEFSR11 connected
> between
> > > the
> > > > > DSL/Cable modem and the 2nd NIC card on the server.
> > > > > Why do you ask?
> > > > > -kw
> > > > >
> > > > > "Gary Dikkema" <gary_d@sbs-net.cdir.ca> wrote in message
> > > > > news:OEoF9ppXDHA.3724@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > Any idea what the percentage is of SBS boxes having a
> > firewall/router
> > > in
> > > > > > front of them?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just trying to get an idea.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gary D
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>