Is Windows XP good enough for an FTP server?

Question

My company is getting a new FTP server. Is XP sufficient, or is the cost of Win2003Server still justified for merely running an FTP server on this machine?

Also- what is the best practice for FTP... Do i really need RAID1 for OS & RAID5 for data? Thats how our main servers will be setup, but i'm not sure its necessary on something as simple as an FTP machine.

Answer 1

If you only need 10 concurrent sessions or less then XP will do fine. If you need more than that, you'll need a server OS such as Server 2003. If you're familiar with *nix OSs, a Linux box would do the job nicely as well and cost less in the long run.

How you configure the hard drive system depends upon how much storage space you need and what kind of reliability you need. RAID 1 for the OS and RAID 5 for data is a good setup. If you only need a limited amount of storage space, a single RAID 1 array for both will do fine. Just set up 2 partitions on it and go for it.

Don't forget to move the default FTP site from C:\Inetpub\Ftproot to some location on your data partition. D:\Ftproot will work nicely.

Answer 2

Sanguas is giving you good advice. The basic steps are: 1. Install an FTP server on your windows box. Filezilla is fine. 2. Configure a port forward in your linksys router for FTP to your windows box. This is port 21 tcp unless you need to use a non standard port. Some ISPs block port 21 so you might have to use an alternate. 3. Find a way to know your public IP address. That's what dyndns is for. If you are on a static IP then you don't have to worry about this. otherwise, setup dyndns so when you are away from home you can know what IP your home connection is using. if you are "computer savvy", this should not be too hard, just go slow and make sure you understand each step. google is your friend, there are tons of how-to guides on this online.

Answer 3

Wrong question.

This is one of those times you should seek a solution outside a Microsoft product. If this server is to be purely used as an FTP-Only Server then placing a WIndows operating system on it is overkill. I reccomend either a brand of *nix or if you want a commercial product try a Netware server. These all run much lighter at the server-side freeing up for resources for the server to perform it's primary tasks.

This is also a matter of costs too as MS is more expensive and *nix/Netware can run headless servers.

Windows XP/2k3 is too much for a FTP-Only server.

As for utilizing RAID, well the answer to that is best found by asking, "How critical is the data your company stores there?" If the data is core information that is vital to the existance of your company then Yes I'd go with raid. If this is not mission-critical data being store then I would suggest a different method of archiving your data stored on there (external HDD, CDR/CDRW, etc...).

This is primarily an issue of costs vs. needs, if you don't need it then don't spend the money on it. Now days I'm recommending for small to medium sized buisinesses storing important but not critical data to use external HDD's stored off site in fireproof containers. Not too expensive, versitille, and easy to use.

Have a good day.

Answer 4

no i think its not ......
if you think w2003s is costly try win2000server