Cloud Based Server - Pros and Cons

[Bev]

We are in need of a new server, and the head and ICT governor are keen on a cloud based server. I know nothing about cloud based servers and would like to know the pros and cons of this approach in school.

[djm968]

Depends what roles the cloud based server is required for. Most school that have implemented cloud services use a hybrid setup and retain a local server.

[Bev]

I get the impression it's instead of a local server.

[FishCustard]

We are in need of a new server, and the head and ICT governor are keen on a cloud based server. I know nothing about cloud based servers and would like to know the pros and cons of this approach in school.

 

First step would be to ask them why they want a cloud based system - cost, availability of remote access, etc? Only then can you assess the options against the criteria the school have. It may be that a cloud based system will be the best option - or, they might be missing the point entirely and it'd be a huge mistake.

[smoothwall]

I’ve found myself here in the same situation like you before explaining that

Your 'Up shit creek without a paddle if the internet gets cut from outside and you don’t have a 2^nd line coming in and if you do its very expensive to get one. We have gone nearly completely server less here moving Sims to Broadcom and have Admin staff using just only Chromebook’s, and binning all Windows devices.The staff are using Cloud completely here and they hate it….

[jmak]

If you want to replace your domain controller, you'll need something onsite to issue IP addresses.

 

You'll need a way of setting up a connection to the server in the cloud - I believe most people set up a VPN.

 

I know that Airhead have a product that does this - complete replacement of onsite server.

 

http://blog.airhead.io/meet-airhead-360

[djm968]

What you need to do explain to them is that there are different types of "cloud" services. Most Schools use SaaS (Software as a Service) cloud services like Microsoft Office 365 and Google Cloud and these services are free for education. If you are looking to move your server(s) to the cloud, this is IaaS (Infrastructure as a Service) there are going to be cost implications and you are completely dependant on your internet connection.

[sparkeh]

Yes I think that you need to know why they want a cloud based server, what roles it will perform and what benefits they think it will bring.

Then you can start assessing the viability and costs. Some questions that spring to mind: what bandwidth do you have on your internet connection and what effect will it have on the user experience, is it reliable, what happens if there is an outage? etc

[supportman]

If its for email, then Office 365 is basically a cloud server. Most schools will have already done this.

[mikkydoos]

Head teachers and ICT Governors usually know everything there is to know about IT and are in a great position in order to guide an educational environment from a technical perspective.

 

Oh no sorry.... they don't... sarc. :p:p:p:p:p:p

 

 

What's the function, what do they actually want to achieve, and what's your environment?

[Bev]

Why? Because it's 'new' and 'the latest thing' and 'we should always be looking forward and not backward', it's supposed to make things slick and easy and we will have no more issues apparently.....

I honestly don't know why but I can sense that this is going to be pushed at me unless I can find a good argument against it.

 

We already have google email and use google docs quite a bit, but we still use traditional PCs and office as well.

 

We will be a 1-1 iPad school in September, but the teachers still have PCs, and we have PCs in the ICT suite. I don't even understand the notion of a cloud based server, would we still be able to run software on the PCs and saved to a shared drive for example?

Can teachers still use traditional Word on their PC, or is it just Office 365 in a browser? Staff hate some aspects of Google Docs but have really embraced the shared drive and all our shared files are now stored there making the shared folders somewhat redundant.

 

We have a 100mg line, it's normally about 70mg but it's considered too slow when we have lots of students on iPads. I can only think that putting everything in the cloud will just make things slower.

 

We are talking about getting a direct internet line (currently we go through the council), new wifi infrastructure and new firewall/filtering in place.

 

 

I've used Airhead before, just for accessing gmail and sharing out pages of links but I wasn't over impressed.

[mikkydoos]

Why? Because it's 'new' and 'the latest thing' and 'we should always be looking forward and not backward', it's supposed to make things slick and easy and we will have no more issues apparently.....

I honestly don't know why but I can sense that this is going to be pushed at me unless I can find a good argument against it.

 

We already have google email and use google docs quite a bit, but we still use traditional PCs and office as well.

 

We will be a 1-1 iPad school in September, but the teachers still have PCs, and we have PCs in the ICT suite. I don't even understand the notion of a cloud based server, would we still be able to run software on the PCs and saved to a shared drive for example?

Can teachers still use traditional Word on their PC, or is it just Office 365 in a browser? Staff hate some aspects of Google Docs but have really embraced the shared drive and all our shared files are now stored there making the shared folders somewhat redundant.

 

We have a 100mg line, it's normally about 70mg but it's considered too slow when we have lots of students on iPads. I can only think that putting everything in the cloud will just make things slower.

 

We are talking about getting a direct internet line (currently we go through the council), new wifi infrastructure and new firewall/filtering in place.

 

 

I've used Airhead before, just for accessing gmail and sharing out pages of links but I wasn't over impressed.

 

 

Let them know theyre already using loads of cloud servers then. That might placate them.

 

Sounds like a a mammoth task to me... and a totally unneccesary one too... good luck on doing that with a LA provided line too

 

 

Are you using Apple classroom? Thats cloud if you're using 1-1 ipads.

[Bev]

Yes, we use apple classroom, and everything google.

 

To be fair, we use the cloud a lot anyway.

 

We need a new server and this has been proposed as an alternative, along with getting rid of the LA provided line.

[jmak]

I honestly don't know why but I can sense that this is going to be pushed at me unless I can find a good argument against it.

 

 

Get a quote [emoji6].

 

Cloud services can save money for particular purposes, especially with education pricing - sounds like you're already doing that.

 

Infrastructure as a Service tends not to be cheap.

[mikkydoos]

Yes, we use apple classroom, and everything google.

 

To be fair, we use the cloud a lot anyway.

 

We need a new server and this has been proposed as an alternative, along with getting rid of the LA provided line.

 

 

 

Server for what ? DC? MIS ?

[Bev]

The MIS is hosted on the council's server.

So, yes, I assume Domain Controller, Active Directory, Group Policy (do these things even have a place in this brave new world? I have no idea)

[mikkydoos]

Then your guys are talking B*ll*x. You can do that for a grand in a day.

[Bev]

Do what? Set up a traditional server?

[sparkeh]

The MIS is hosted on the council's server.

So, yes, I assume Domain Controller, Active Directory, Group Policy (do these things even have a place in this brave new world? I have no idea)

A cloud enthusiast may well come along and dispute this but from what you have said, to me, this has the potential to get expensive very quickly and perform poorly.

[djm968]

Do what? Set up a traditional server?

 

Yes you could purchase and install a new local domain controller for around a grand, it probably wouldn't provide too much local storage for this money but the cloud provides this for free anyway.

[Bev]

A cloud enthusiast may well come along and dispute this but from what you have said, to me, this has the potential to get expensive very quickly and perform poorly.

 

That's my thought too. I just need to be able to clarify my argument as the pro-cloud advocates are very enthusiastic.

[Ditto]

I’ve found myself here in the same situation like you before explaining that

Your 'Up shit creek without a paddle if the internet gets cut from outside and you don’t have a 2^nd line coming in and if you do its very expensive to get one. We have gone nearly completely server less here moving Sims to Broadcom and have Admin staff using just only Chromebook’s, and binning all Windows devices.The staff are using Cloud completely here and they hate it….

What do they 'hate' about it?

[mikkydoos]

Do what? Set up a traditional server?

 

Yeah. Easy.

 

 

Put it in the loft if they want cloud. :p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p

[localzuk]

I think you need to be a bit more defined in what you'd want to achieve. "Cloud server" is a nebulous term that means many things to many people.

 

If you are simply looking at whether you could achieve the same services you have onsite at present, but hosted in the cloud, then yes, this can be done. However, it will cost you far more than simply having an onsite server - logically, it has to. You're paying someone else to run the same bit of kit you already run. So they've gotta make money on it somehow.

 

Instead, approach the issue differently - what is it your onsite server does. Are each of those services necessary now, with Windows 10 and the "new way" of doing things? Eg. If you use your server for WDS, MDT or Ghost, have you looked at the other ways Microsoft now recommend when provisioning devices - InTune, Windows Configuration Designer etc...

 

If its for Active Directory - do you *need* traditional Active Directory, or would Azure AD do the job with Windows 10? Do you *need* Group Policy? Or would the more limited featureset of Intune handle what you need to do?

 

If its for DHCP? You would require an onsite device to handle this, regardles - you can't put a DHCP server in the cloud. However, this is a very small task and a low powered device can handle it.

 

DNS? Upshifting your DNS infrastructure may be possible into something like Azure DNS for private domains, rather than running a discrete DNS server. However, this is in preview at the moment and not recommended for production. But again, DNS is a very small task, so a small local device could handle it just fine.

I'd hazard that if you already store your files mostly in Google's systems, and are moving to a 1:1 iPad solution, you could well be a suitable candidate for moving a lot to cloud. Just don't take that to mean "buy a VM and stick everything on it like we do already".

One system that may have a query over it is print server - the solutions on the market seem to be reliant on an onsite print server still.

 

This sort of thing takes a lot of planning, and potentially can cost you more than just using the old way of doing things.

 

Finally, don't underestimate the internet traffic you're going to be facing. If you're already struggling on a 100Mbps line, you would really want to upgrade before adding more devices or shifting more into the cloud.

Edited December 7, 2018 by localzuk

[sparkeh]

Also I think that they need to be made aware that they are thinking about things in the wrong way. Whilst, technically, you can set up this type of server in the cloud, cloud services are not really designed to do this and simply uploading your server to the cloud is not best practice (stated by MS). Migration to the cloud involves a change of thinking.

 

Have a read:

https://jumpcloud.com/blog/on-prem-domain-controller-to-the-cloud/

https://truestack.com/moving-your-on-prem-windows-domain-controllers-to-the-cloud-the-solution/

 

Of course this information is biased toward buying their services but does illustrate the issues with trying the approach requested by the Head and Gov.

 

On a side note, as a governor myself, I question the involvement of the governor in this strikes me as too operational.