Text 5263, 149 rader
Skriven 2005-03-18 14:55:00 av CHARLES ANGELICH (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av ALAN ZISMAN
Ärende: Re: lan
===============

123c541737ee
win95



Hello Alan - 

CA>> 'Server', to me, means a machine executing server software
CA>> that is unable to function as a client while executing
CA>> that software. True a 'server' serves but 'sharing' is not
CA>> 'serving'. Sharing implies that the machine can become a
CA>> client at any time. A server often has no monitor attached
CA>> and some have no keyboard since a server _only_ serves it
CA>> does not require human access components. 

AZ> There are a lot of situations that are in a gray-area
AZ> here... I know several people who are running web-serving
AZ> software on the same system that they use for graphics
AZ> editing, keeping their books, word processing, etc. 

AZ> The system is a server connected to the Internet, but it's
AZ> also a workstation. 

That Windows multitasks many virtual machines is a 'given' so
much so that people no longer differentiate. The key here is
"people who are running web-serving software". If Windows was
capable of performing the functions of a server there would be
no need for people to execute "web-serving software". 

For instance, my web pages exist on a server that can execute
CGI code. In my case that would be PERL. ASP, PHP, and other
functions can be performed to create 'dynamic' webpages.
Windows machines using P2P as quasi-servers cannot do any of
these functions. 

The ability of Windows to perform server functions using server
software from within one virtual machine while offering other
virtual machines for other tasks does not alter the differences
between what a server can normally offer it's clients and what
a P2P can offer to 'share' with other machines. 

CA>> I do get your point that only two machines are 'sharing'
CA>> but a server can _only_ serve up files and cannot grab
CA>> files from the rest of the network. In this case, the two
CA>> machine _could_ with minor changes to the configurations. 

AZ> Again, because all Windows versions include the possibilty
AZ> of turning on file-sharing, I could sit at a network server
AZ> (running say Windows 2000 Server) and still access files
AZ> sitting on a workstation that had file-sharing enabled-- or
AZ> print to a printer connected to a workstation with
AZ> print-sharing turned on. It's not as black and white as you
AZ> seem to be imagining... at least not in the real world of
AZ> office workgroups that may be fuzzing the boundaries. 

Once we acknowledge that we are using multiple virtual machines
the 'fuzz' disappears. :-) 

If you or your school decided to include web services within
the intranet including ASP, PHP, and use of CGI then it would
be necessary to install server software on that 'server'. Many
businesses _do_ require those functions and _do_ install server
software. 

AZ>> As I said above, one can define the term 'server' in a
AZ>> variety of ways. In my school district, there has,
AZ>> historically, been some politics around this-- for a
AZ>> couple of years, the district IT department was pushing
AZ>> what it called a 'Local Area Network Initiative' aiming to
AZ>> put Novell servers into elementary schools, serving an
AZ>> expensive collection of (in my opinion poorly designed)
AZ>> IBM educational software. I opposed having my school buy
AZ>> in (schools had to put up their own money to buy into this
AZ>> program), noting that we already had a local area network.
AZ>> The IT administrator pooh-poohed my network, since as a
AZ>> peer-to-peer network, it wasn't a 'real' LAN... regardless
AZ>> of whether it worked for us (and was affordable by us).
AZ>> The whole experience left me bitter and twisted around the
AZ>> question of what's a 'real' network, however. 

CA>> I'm sorry that the school's IT department has not been
CA>> appreciative of your efforts to save the schools some
CA>> money. Bureaucracies can be unrewarding to have to deal
CA>> with. :-( 

CA>> I'm only trying to define terms here. I have no axe to
CA>> grind as to what constitutes a _real_ network or what
CA>> networking software is better than the other. 

AZ> I do appreciate that you aren't attacking my use of
AZ> peer-to-peer... and in a situation where money was not an
AZ> object, I might happily agree that buying 'real' server
AZ> hardware with a 'real' server operating system would offer
AZ> better performance and stability than my home-made setup. 

I can't say for certain that performance on the same hardware
would be better or worse. Stability varies with the OS, the
configuration of the install, and many other factors. 

AZ>>> A Linux installation can be used either as a workstation
AZ>>> or a server; the difference is what optional programs are
AZ>>> installed (Apache for web serving, for instance). 

CA>>> This would also be true for Windows. I don't see a
CA>>> difference here? 

AZ> The difference is that MS sells separate Windows Server OS
AZ> versions,charges for client licenses to connect to a
AZ> Windows server (beyond a minimum number of licenses
AZ> included with the base server license) and limits the
AZ> number of clients that can connect to non-server versions
AZ> of WinNT/2000/XP. So the differences between Windows and
AZ> Linux in these regards are licensing and cost issues more
AZ> than they are purely technical. 

CA>> You mention Apache for web serving and the difference
CA>> being what optional programs are installed is where I am
CA>> drowning in terminology. For me clients are _always_
CA>> clients while executing client software and servers are
CA>> _always_ servers when executing server software. From this
CA>> perspective P2P is not a true 'network' (no servers) and
CA>> is only sharing resources (similar to bittorrent - no
CA>> servers per se). 

AZ> See above... if I install webserver or ftp server or email
AZ> server software on my home computer, it is providing
AZ> specific server services, while continuing to act as a
AZ> workstation at the same time. 

Within one virtual machine it can be a server. Within that
virtual machine it _cannot_ also be a client. 

I mis-spoke when I said P2P is not a true network. P2P is a LAN
(Local Area Network) but it is not an 'active' server that can
execute code to access a database, modify code prior to
delivery, and other functions of an 'active' server such as
Apache or IIS etc. 

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>     <|                              |>  __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__
 

--- * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.devedia.com/dosghost/
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)