Server for ward

I'm new to this forum. Didn't even realize it existed 'til I stumbled across it the other morning.

I was called a while back to be Ward Technical Specialist, & we have 3 FHC computers plus the clerk's computer plus a notebook that resides in the Bishop's office but floats about.

I'm curious if there's anything about having a server at the ward, to be a home for church videos, & to act as a WSUS server for updating the ward computers? We just upgraded our Internet from old DSL to cable & have more bandwidth, but I come from old school where I'd like to keep bandwidth usage under control, instead of having everything using the pipe.

There's been some talk about setting up media servers, but I think only one has done so. I've set up a FHC server years ago when the church-sold software was popular, but I'm not sure as it's seeing much use these days.

WSUS isn't needed, both FHC and Clerk computers are managed through Tivoli... but as a means to host data for units in a ward - feel free to do what you want... The church is on a quick 1.5 year (so far) project to 'evaluate' local media hosting - it's nowhere near to being something we'll see soon. My experience is just move ahead, get it done, waiting on SLC is not something you should concern yourself with.

Thank you for the replies. I've heard of Tivoli but never had any dealings with it in all the years I worked in I.T. It would be nice to set up some sort of server to keep Internet bandwidth consumption to a minimum. I have experience, since I retired, working with Windows Home Server (v1 & 2011) but it's on its way out. Perhaps a LINUX server of some sort might be something I could investigate (haven't worked with LINUX much, but it shouldn't be subject to number of user limitations of WHS. Main thing will be to set up media server such that PC, Apple & Android devices that members are packing will be able to reach media on local LAN rather than all fighting for Internet bandwidth. I'd look at iTunes but it has a number of user limitation too.

One thing I would say is don't go with something too complicated for the average user, or that is not well-documented. Linux might be good for servers in general, but may not be the easiest to troubleshoot in the future if you are released and another who isn't as tech-savvy is called in your stead.

That said, I don't know enough to have any specific suggestions...

Thx. KISS is the principle I like to follow.

I was just approached in church today and asked if I would like to assist in implementing a beta multimedia server for our meetinghouse. I was told one of our ward members has been working on this at CHQ, but I haven't confirmed that yet. If I'm allowed, I'll post more details and our progress in the project.

As an FYI, the Church uses WSUS in addition to TEM to make sure computers are updated. Going back a couple of years, WSUS settings were pushed out via MLS, and one of the first "patches" that went out via WSUS was TEM Both of them are used to make sure machines are up-to-date. We also have a number of relay servers around the world that balance the load and distribute patches so that traffic doesn't have to come all the way from headquarters.

My recommendation is to make sure that both TEM and Sophos are installed and not worry about patching anymore. There are so many other things you can do with your time such as teaching people how to use the online calendar, directory, Duty to God, Personal Progress, Come Follow Me videos, etc.

Like you, I'm hopeful that one day there will be some sort of local media server! I know that different groups have looked into this before, and they are constantly evaluating options. My observation is that this is more of an issue of "does this really need to be done right now" than "can it be done."

bfromm wrote:My recommendation is to make sure that both TEM and Sophos are installed and not worry about patching anymore.

Sorry, I've had the experience where patching didn't take place until I managed to get Windows updates working.

bfromm wrote:My observation is that this is more of an issue of "does this really need to be done right now" than "can it be done."

Considering:

• The media prepared for youth lessons
• meetinghouses with limited bandwidth
• That we've been told to download, not stream the videos

I'm surprised this is even a question.

If you were to say "where is this in our list of priorities?", THAT I understand all too well.

russellhltn wrote:Considering:

• The media prepared for youth lessons
• meetinghouses with limited bandwidth
• That we've been told to download, not stream the videos

I'm surprised this is even a question.

This is exactly why "Teachers are strongly encouraged to download videos before coming to church." We just need Google to put cheap fiber connections into each of our buildings

russellhltn wrote:If you were to say "where is this in our list of priorities?", THAT I understand all too well.

This is probably a better way to say it. My comment should have said "does this really need to be done right now in light of the other priorities and initiatives we're working on?"

One problem that most of us have is how highly saturated the bandwidth is in Utah. I hear regularly of meetinghoues/stake centers with 40-50 Mbps in their stake centers... Utah is regularly in the top 5 of connected users/bandwidth per user in the country. Additionally with the number of churches in the Mormon Corridor makes a cost/per/connection pricing with large vendors a very low price where the concentration is high.

So here in Missouri $49.95 per month gets you 1.5 Mbps Down connections, in Utah that's a 30 Mbps Down speed.

All these factors lead me to understand completely why in Utah a group of technologists would think, 'does this really need to be done right now' - because streaming all you want works fine in my ward here in SLC.

JohnShaw wrote:...because streaming all you want works fine in my ward here in SLC.

This is not actually the case. Even in areas that have a large abundance of Internet bandwidth available, members are encouraged to ALWAYS download media beforehand and avoid streaming whenever possible. The biggest reason is the church's servers are just not able to sustain the load that would otherwise be put on them, and they are well aware of that.

Mikerowaved wrote:The biggest reason is the church's servers are just not able to sustain the load that would otherwise be put on them, and they are well aware of that.

So, I was using some hyperbole to make a point - However I'm not inclined to believe this is the case. I had an eloquent response written about how after-the-fact all the CFM stuff was, but it doesn't really matter, it's either Pearls before Swine or not airing dirty laundry to affect the weak among us.

We setup a NAS which is easier to maintain if you just want to have a storage spot for FH, Seminary and Institute, Stake Presidency or Bishopric shared docs, etc. We used a 2 disk Synology NAS and it worked flawlessly.