| Author | Messages | |
mark.parris@xxxx.yyy
 | | 12/14/2005 11:14 AM |
| Frank,
This should not be an issue in your environment as you have a single domain. By definition a GC holds only a partial replica of the other domains in the forest and you have none.
Regards
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Abagnale
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 02:19:06
To:Active
Subject: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
I currently have a single domain (w2k3 FFL) with approx 40 DC's. (1 for every site) They are all configured as GC's. I have approx 3500 users
The WAN connection speed ranges from 512k to 2mb.
I read somewhere that having every DC as a GC is unnecessary due to the increased amounts of bandwith replication.
My network is not exactly the quickest and with the other apps and services I am running e.g DNS, WINS, DFS/FRS, Exchange, Sharepoint etc,
This has led me to think maybe I should think about reducing the number of GC's in my forest
Does anyone have any views on decreasing the number of GC's to DC's? What would you recommend as a comfortable number of GC's
Frank
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| ZJORZ
Posts:100
| | 12/14/2005 11:18 AM |
| ________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Simpsen, Paul A. (HSC)
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 11:07 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Appreciate the input, it verified what I had thought. But when I started seeing if single domain, etc.... well I had to ask. And yes refreshing = dcpromo out and dcpromo on new HW.
Thanks
Paul
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Almeida Pinto, Jorge de
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 2:15 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The IM is a domain FSMO role. SO the only concern is WITHIN the domain....
No matter what forest structure you have for each domain the following applies:
* If all DCs in a domain are GC, there is no other choice where to put the IM. So no issue here
* If at least other DCs in a domain (besides the IM) are not a GC, then the IM should not be on a GC
your method will work as long as the last DC, that is not a GC, being refreshed (do you mean re-installed?) is also the IM
cheers
Jorge
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Simpsen, Paul A. (HSC)
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:09 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Let me ask if there is any issue with IM if all your DC's are GC's in your domain, which is a child, but not all the DC's in the forest are GC's? We have been refreshing our DC's and making all GC's but the IM is running on the last one to refresh which is not a GC. We plan on transferring this role to a GC while we refreshing the DC it currently resides on. It will be a GC when finished. Should I/we rethink this? We are at function level 2003.
Paul
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of neil.ruston@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:47 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Really, how so?
I 'solve' it by insisting that all DCs be GCs.
neil
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ChuckGaff@xxxxxxx
Sent: 14 December 2005 16:15
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain forests...
Chuck
PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is confidential and
intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an intended
recipient of this email please notify the sender immediately and delete your
copy from your system. You must not copy, distribute or take any further
action in reliance on it. Email is not a secure method of communication and
Nomura International plc ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by law,
accept responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness of,
or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or disabling
code in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If verification of this
email is sought then please request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated
this email: (1) is not, and should not be treated or relied upon as,
investment research; (2) contains views or opinions that are solely those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is intended
for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation, solicitation or
offer to buy or sell securities or related financial instruments. NIplc
does not provide investment services to private customers. Authorised and
regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Registered in England
no. 1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 St Martin's-le-Grand,
London, EC1A 4NP. A member of the Nomura group of companies.
This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.
> | | | |
| mark.parris@xxxx.yyy
| | 12/14/2005 11:44 AM |
| Where is Dean, have not seen him on this list for weeks?
-----Original Message-----
From: "joe"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:10:38
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Yep. Basically the end result is the same, just don't agree with the
phrasing much.
The best descriptions I have seen have been by Dean Wells. If you search the
newsgroups and adorg archives for Dean and Infrastructure Master and
Phantoms you will find some pretty in depth discussions. He even describes
how to see the update objects using adfind.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of deji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 11:31 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
I don't think Joe is disagreeing with THAT point. John has the general idea,
but his description/explanation is somewhat .... shall we say ......glossy.
Sincerely,
Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCT
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Scott, Anthony
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
John is right though. If all DCs are GCs, putting the IM role on a GC isn't
a problem.
Thank You,
Anthony Scott
Berbee
4690 E. Fulton Dr., Bldg. C
Ada, Michigan 49301
(616) 481-9722
(616) 464-6369
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Za Vue
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:45 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Who wrote it?
************************************************************************
*************************************J
John Savill
John Savill is Director of Technical Infrastructure for Geniant. He is a
CISSP, a Security and Messaging MCSE on Windows Server 2003, a six-time MVP,
and a Krav Maga instructor. He is also the author of Windows Server
2003 Active Directory Design and Implementation from Packt Publishing
(http://www.packtpub.com/book/active_directory).
Email address: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
************************************************************************
*****************************************
joe wrote:
>Wow who wrote that article in the magazine? That is pretty bad.
>
>The end result is the same though as stated by everyone so far. If you
have
>a single domain there is only slight overhead if you make all DCs into
GCs.
>The only overhead I can really think of is that you will have more
global
>catalog DNS records and all DCs are listening on an extra 1-2 ports...
That
>is easily outweighed by the gain of having lots of GC availability.
>
>Not sure what space usage you would incur by NOT doing it as indicated
by
>the article. The whole IM role thing is pretty oddly described as well.
>
>
>
>
>
>
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| mark.parris@xxxx.yyy
| | 12/14/2005 11:59 AM |
| Are you going to use new netbios names for the DC's ?.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:07:52
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Appreciate the input, it verified what I had thought. But when I started seeing if single domain, etc. well I had to ask. And yes refreshing = dcpromo out and dcpromo on new HW.
Thanks
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Almeida Pinto, Jorge de
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 2:15 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The IM is a domain FSMO role. SO the only concern is WITHIN the domain....
No matter what forest structure you have for each domain the following applies:
* If all DCs in a domain are GC, there is no other choice where to put the IM. So no issue here
* If at least other DCs in a domain (besides the IM) are not a GC, then the IM should not be on a GC
your method will work as long as the last DC, that is not a GC, being refreshed (do you mean re-installed?) is also the IM
cheers
Jorge
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Simpsen, Paul A. (HSC)
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:09 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Let me ask if there is any issue with IM if all your DCs are GCs in your domain, which is a child, but not all the DCs in the forest are GCs? We have been refreshing our DCs and making all GCs but the IM is running on the last one to refresh which is not a GC. We plan on transferring this role to a GC while we refreshing the DC it currently resides on. It will be a GC when finished. Should I/we rethink this? We are at function level 2003.
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of neil.ruston@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:47 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Really, how so?
I 'solve' it by insisting that all DCs be GCs.
neil
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ChuckGaff@xxxxxxx
Sent: 14 December 2005 16:15
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain forests...
Chuck
PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is confidential and
intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an intended
recipient of this email please notify the sender immediately and delete your
copy from your system. You must not copy, distribute or take any further
action in reliance on it. Email is not a secure method of communication and
Nomura International plc ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by law,
accept responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness of,
or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or disabling
code in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If verification of this
email is sought then please request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated
this email: (1) is not, and should not be treated or relied upon as,
investment research; (2) contains views or opinions that are solely those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is intended
for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation, solicitation or
offer to buy or sell securities or related financial instruments. NIplc
does not provide investment services to private customers. Authorised and
regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Registered in England
no. 1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 St Martin's-le-Grand,
London, EC1A 4NP. A member of the Nomura group of companies.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| listmail
Posts:429
| | 12/15/2005 1:11 AM |
| He is really busy on a contract at the moment. It should be wrapping up shortly though and after his shellshock wears off he will probably bound back into action with his perverse british humour. It has been a joy for me watching him work on that contract as it is big business trials and tribulations at its finest and it is good for all techies to occasionally experience that. I say you haven't lived until you have jumped through the hoops put in front of you in a Fortune 25 or bigger environment. I have other friends that say the same about government or military IT work. :o)
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 6:37 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Where is Dean, have not seen him on this list for weeks?
-----Original Message-----
From: "joe"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:10:38
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Yep. Basically the end result is the same, just don't agree with the phrasing much.
The best descriptions I have seen have been by Dean Wells. If you search the newsgroups and adorg archives for Dean and Infrastructure Master and Phantoms you will find some pretty in depth discussions. He even describes how to see the update objects using adfind.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of deji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 11:31 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
I don't think Joe is disagreeing with THAT point. John has the general idea, but his description/explanation is somewhat .... shall we say ......glossy.
Sincerely,
Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCT
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Scott, Anthony
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
John is right though. If all DCs are GCs, putting the IM role on a GC isn't a problem.
Thank You,
Anthony Scott
Berbee
4690 E. Fulton Dr., Bldg. C
Ada, Michigan 49301
(616) 481-9722
(616) 464-6369
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Za Vue
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:45 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Who wrote it?
************************************************************************
*************************************J
John Savill
John Savill is Director of Technical Infrastructure for Geniant. He is a
CISSP, a Security and Messaging MCSE on Windows Server 2003, a six-time MVP, and a Krav Maga instructor. He is also the author of Windows Server
2003 Active Directory Design and Implementation from Packt Publishing (http://www.packtpub.com/book/active_directory).
Email address: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
************************************************************************
*****************************************
joe wrote:
>Wow who wrote that article in the magazine? That is pretty bad.
>
>The end result is the same though as stated by everyone so far. If you
have
>a single domain there is only slight overhead if you make all DCs into
GCs.
>The only overhead I can really think of is that you will have more
global
>catalog DNS records and all DCs are listening on an extra 1-2 ports...
That
>is easily outweighed by the gain of having lots of GC availability.
>
>Not sure what space usage you would incur by NOT doing it as indicated
by
>the article. The whole IM role thing is pretty oddly described as well.
>
>
>
>
>
>
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
.ŠÿÃÅ Å Æ’²§²B§Ãƒ¶v®Å §²rz§ÃƒÅ ryýŠŠ„¢i½®
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| dwells
Posts:39
| | 12/15/2005 2:14 AM |
| Sorry about the absence ... will be back at some point in the near future.
In regards to Joe's comment, I've worked with many large organizations and haven't found this engagement to be particularly different ... just your typical slow-moving, v. large company. Joe's just happy that he's not alone and that someone else gets to feel his pain in an org. of similar size and in the same industry ;o)
--
Dean Wells
MSEtechnology
* Email: dwells@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://msetechnology.com
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:10 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
He is really busy on a contract at the moment. It should be wrapping up shortly though and after his shellshock wears off he will probably bound back into action with his perverse british humour. It has been a joy for me watching him work on that contract as it is big business trials and tribulations at its finest and it is good for all techies to occasionally experience that. I say you haven't lived until you have jumped through the hoops put in front of you in a Fortune 25 or bigger environment. I have other friends that say the same about government or military IT work. :o)
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 6:37 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Where is Dean, have not seen him on this list for weeks?
-----Original Message-----
From: "joe"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:10:38
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Yep. Basically the end result is the same, just don't agree with the phrasing much.
The best descriptions I have seen have been by Dean Wells. If you search the newsgroups and adorg archives for Dean and Infrastructure Master and Phantoms you will find some pretty in depth discussions. He even describes how to see the update objects using adfind.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of deji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 11:31 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
I don't think Joe is disagreeing with THAT point. John has the general idea, but his description/explanation is somewhat .... shall we say ......glossy.
Sincerely,
Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCT
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Scott, Anthony
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
John is right though. If all DCs are GCs, putting the IM role on a GC isn't a problem.
Thank You,
Anthony Scott
Berbee
4690 E. Fulton Dr., Bldg. C
Ada, Michigan 49301
(616) 481-9722
(616) 464-6369
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Za Vue
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:45 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Who wrote it?
************************************************************************
*************************************J
John Savill
John Savill is Director of Technical Infrastructure for Geniant. He is a
CISSP, a Security and Messaging MCSE on Windows Server 2003, a six-time MVP, and a Krav Maga instructor. He is also the author of Windows Server
2003 Active Directory Design and Implementation from Packt Publishing (http://www.packtpub.com/book/active_directory).
Email address: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
************************************************************************
*****************************************
joe wrote:
>Wow who wrote that article in the magazine? That is pretty bad.
>
>The end result is the same though as stated by everyone so far. If you
have
>a single domain there is only slight overhead if you make all DCs into
GCs.
>The only overhead I can really think of is that you will have more
global
>catalog DNS records and all DCs are listening on an extra 1-2 ports...
That
>is easily outweighed by the gain of having lots of GC availability.
>
>Not sure what space usage you would incur by NOT doing it as indicated
by
>the article. The whole IM role thing is pretty oddly described as well.
>
>
>
>
>
>
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
.ŠÿÃÅ Å Æ’²§²B§Ãƒ¶v®Å §²rz§ÃƒÅ ryýŠŠ„¢i½®
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| dwells
Posts:39
| | 12/15/2005 3:14 AM |
| How so?
--Dean WellsMSEtechnology* Email: dwells@msetechnology.comhttp://msetechnology.com
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
ChuckGaff@xxxxxxxSent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 8:15
AMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: Re: [ActiveDir]
Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain
forests...
Chuck | | | |
| psimpsen
Posts:0
| | 12/15/2005 3:51 AM |
| No we are sticking with the same names and so far we have had no issues.
I make sure all records referring to the DC are removed before renaming
the new machine and running dcpromo.
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:39 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Are you going to use new netbios names for the DC's ?.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:07:52
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Appreciate the input, it verified what I had thought. But when I started
seeing if single domain, etc. well I had to ask. And yes refreshing =
dcpromo out and dcpromo on new HW.
Thanks
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Almeida Pinto,
Jorge de
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 2:15 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The IM is a domain FSMO role. SO the only concern is WITHIN the
domain....
No matter what forest structure you have for each domain the following
applies:
* If all DCs in a domain are GC, there is no other choice where to put
the IM. So no issue here
* If at least other DCs in a domain (besides the IM) are not a GC, then
the IM should not be on a GC
your method will work as long as the last DC, that is not a GC, being
refreshed (do you mean re-installed?) is also the IM
cheers
Jorge
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Simpsen, Paul A.
(HSC)
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:09 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Let me ask if there is any issue with IM if all your DCs are GCs in your
domain, which is a child, but not all the DCs in the forest are GCs? We
have been refreshing our DCs and making all GCs but the IM is running on
the last one to refresh which is not a GC. We plan on transferring this
role to a GC while we refreshing the DC it currently resides on. It will
be a GC when finished. Should I/we rethink this? We are at function
level 2003.
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
neil.ruston@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:47 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Really, how so?
I 'solve' it by insisting that all DCs be GCs.
neil
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
ChuckGaff@xxxxxxx
Sent: 14 December 2005 16:15
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain
forests...
Chuck
PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is confidential and
intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an intended
recipient of this email please notify the sender immediately and delete
your
copy from your system. You must not copy, distribute or take any further
action in reliance on it. Email is not a secure method of communication
and
Nomura International plc ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by
law,
accept responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness
of,
or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or disabling
code in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If verification of
this
email is sought then please request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated
this email: (1) is not, and should not be treated or relied upon as,
investment research; (2) contains views or opinions that are solely
those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is
intended
for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation,
solicitation or
offer to buy or sell securities or related financial instruments. NIplc
does not provide investment services to private customers. Authorised
and
regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Registered in England
no. 1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 St
Martin's-le-Grand,
London, EC1A 4NP. A member of the Nomura group of companies.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| mark.parris@xxxx.yyy
| | 12/15/2005 6:08 AM |
| Have fun, I have had some great experiences reusing DC names.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:48:53
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
No we are sticking with the same names and so far we have had no issues.
I make sure all records referring to the DC are removed before renaming
the new machine and running dcpromo.
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:39 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Are you going to use new netbios names for the DC's ?.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:07:52
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Appreciate the input, it verified what I had thought. But when I started
seeing if single domain, etc. well I had to ask. And yes refreshing =
dcpromo out and dcpromo on new HW.
Thanks
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Almeida Pinto,
Jorge de
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 2:15 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The IM is a domain FSMO role. SO the only concern is WITHIN the
domain....
No matter what forest structure you have for each domain the following
applies:
* If all DCs in a domain are GC, there is no other choice where to put
the IM. So no issue here
* If at least other DCs in a domain (besides the IM) are not a GC, then
the IM should not be on a GC
your method will work as long as the last DC, that is not a GC, being
refreshed (do you mean re-installed?) is also the IM
cheers
Jorge
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Simpsen, Paul A.
(HSC)
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:09 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Let me ask if there is any issue with IM if all your DCs are GCs in your
domain, which is a child, but not all the DCs in the forest are GCs? We
have been refreshing our DCs and making all GCs but the IM is running on
the last one to refresh which is not a GC. We plan on transferring this
role to a GC while we refreshing the DC it currently resides on. It will
be a GC when finished. Should I/we rethink this? We are at function
level 2003.
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
neil.ruston@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:47 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Really, how so?
I 'solve' it by insisting that all DCs be GCs.
neil
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
ChuckGaff@xxxxxxx
Sent: 14 December 2005 16:15
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain
forests...
Chuck
PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is confidential and
intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an intended
recipient of this email please notify the sender immediately and delete
your
copy from your system. You must not copy, distribute or take any further
action in reliance on it. Email is not a secure method of communication
and
Nomura International plc ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by
law,
accept responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness
of,
or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or disabling
code in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If verification of
this
email is sought then please request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated
this email: (1) is not, and should not be treated or relied upon as,
investment research; (2) contains views or opinions that are solely
those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is
intended
for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation,
solicitation or
offer to buy or sell securities or related financial instruments. NIplc
does not provide investment services to private customers. Authorised
and
regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Registered in England
no. 1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 St
Martin's-le-Grand,
London, EC1A 4NP. A member of the Nomura group of companies.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| abagnale_lists
Posts:16
| | 12/16/2005 8:35 AM |
| | Message body was not found. | | | |
| listmail
Posts:429
| | 12/20/2005 1:53 AM |
| Excellent thanks for the info Brett.
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Brett Shirley
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 5:32 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Send - AD mailing list'
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Ignoring the fairly over-discussed if every DC is a GC anyway, the
Infrastructure FSMO / Master (IM) can be on GC aspect ...
In "the standard forest" (if there is such a thing) with a mix of DCs and
GCs, the Infrastructure FSMO must be on a non-GC, for both win2k and win2k3.
There has been no change here.
What you might be thinking of is the fact that we (in fact I) made it so a
win2k3 DC can perform the duties of the Domain Naming FSMO / Master even if
it is not a GC. Win2k only knowns how to perform the duties of the Naming
FSMO on a GC.
Basically the contstraints were such that for win2k these two roles couldn't
even exist on the same machine. Now they can both be held on a non-GC as of
Win2k3.
Cheers,
BrettSh [msft]
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, joe wrote:
> I am curious myself. I seem to recall a rumour to that effect
> previously but have not seen anything substantial.
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dean Wells
> Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:13 PM
> To: Send - AD mailing list
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
>
>
> How so?
> --
> Dean Wells
> MSEtechnology
> * Email: dwells @msetechnology.com
> http://msetechnology.com
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> ChuckGaff@xxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 8:15 AM
> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
>
>
> The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain
> forests...
>
> Chuck
>
>
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| listmail
Posts:429
| | 12/20/2005 2:17 AM |
| Well there were two possible cases.
The first is reload in place. This is where you take a DC and reload the OS
that was on it with a newer version of the OS and repromote. We had an
automated load process that once the image was copied to the DCs spare disk
it would take about an hour or so to rebuild into a new DC and then the
DCPromo time would vary based on whether you could use IFM or not. A non-IFM
promo could take hours and hours of course depending on the WAN Line. An IFM
would be relatively quick.
The second is actual replacement of a machine. In this case, a machine would
be loaded next to an existing machine with a name of oldnameB. Then when
ready for promo, the old machine would be demoted, renamed to oldnameC, and
shut down, new machine would be renamed and reIPed and then promoted. Again,
depending on promo method, time could vary. An alternate to this is just to
load the new machine after the old one has been renamed, a complete server
build only took 30-60 minutes this includes getting all of the third party
software, etc into place as it was all automated/scripted.
If you use the same IP address, name resolution is in good shape with the
exception of the registration of the new GUID host record which needs to be
replicated which shouldn't be an issue. If the IPs aren't the same then you
have to wait for name resolution replication for the new HOST records and
WINS (only if you require it). Other than that, the biggest issue would be
SPNs which really isn't anything big, that is normal replication and should
be fine relatively quickly. There was a point in the very early days of 2K
(August 2000 or so) when we were deploying something like 15 or so DCs a day
and there was an issue in a script that produced the sites/site links and
the DCs SPNs weren't properly updated in the main AD. I ran into that one
afternoon around 1PM on the day I was supposed to go on a vacation. I
crashed on it and figured out the SPNs weren't in sync and manually synced
them and everything was fine and I went on vacation that evening after 6PM
and came back in a week and wrote it up for MS. I have never seen that issue
again, not sure if I have just been luckier or MS changed something with how
the SPNs are set.
If the demotion of the original DC didn't go well (or failed outright) you
need to clean up the objects in the AD and then let them replicate around,
in that case I wouldn't wait any longer than my replication latency for a
domain (which in the largest domain of 100 or so DCs was maybe 45 minutes
under 2K and about 15-20 for K3).
The only serious issue I have ever really had with changing DCs out was with
dumb applications that were hard coded to point at specific DCs. With those,
the application owner had to get the buy-in from the Enterprise Admins to
ACCEPT the hard coded requirement. I.E. If someone just did it and the DC
went down or was being worked on, it was on the app owners head, not the
domain admins. Otherwise the app owner needed to find a way to make their
app auto failover properly or they had to fail it over themselves when
something was changed or failed. I went into several "we are going to kick
your butt" meetings over that point and we always won the arguments. The
Enterprise Admins can not be responsible for every half assed attempt at
anyone using the Domains. The only hard coded requirement that we had
accepted as a responsibility while I was there handling Ops was for the ADC
for Exchange and that was with a distinct limited time frame with a defined
End of Life.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thommes, Michael M.
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 6:45 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Hi joe,
If it's not too much trouble, could you list the steps you take
(including wait times) to replace a DC with the same name? I am especially
interested in how long a particularly named DC would not be available to the
AD audience. Thanks!
Mike Thommes
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 9:43 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
What kind of issues did you have Mark? I have replaced literally hundreds of
DCs and maintained the names and have had no issues over the years.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 1:06 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Have fun, I have had some great experiences reusing DC names.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:48:53
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
No we are sticking with the same names and so far we have had no issues.
I make sure all records referring to the DC are removed before renaming the
new machine and running dcpromo.
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:39 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Are you going to use new netbios names for the DC's ?.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:07:52
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Appreciate the input, it verified what I had thought. But when I started
seeing if single domain, etc. well I had to ask. And yes refreshing =
dcpromo out and dcpromo on new HW.
Thanks
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Almeida Pinto,
Jorge de
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 2:15 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The IM is a domain FSMO role. SO the only concern is WITHIN the domain....
No matter what forest structure you have for each domain the following
applies:
* If all DCs in a domain are GC, there is no other choice where to put the
IM. So no issue here
* If at least other DCs in a domain (besides the IM) are not a GC, then the
IM should not be on a GC
your method will work as long as the last DC, that is not a GC, being
refreshed (do you mean re-installed?) is also the IM
cheers
Jorge
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Simpsen, Paul A.
(HSC)
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:09 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Let me ask if there is any issue with IM if all your DCs are GCs in your
domain, which is a child, but not all the DCs in the forest are GCs? We have
been refreshing our DCs and making all GCs but the IM is running on the last
one to refresh which is not a GC. We plan on transferring this role to a GC
while we refreshing the DC it currently resides on. It will be a GC when
finished. Should I/we rethink this? We are at function level 2003.
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
neil.ruston@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:47 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Really, how so?
I 'solve' it by insisting that all DCs be GCs.
neil
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ChuckGaff@xxxxxxx
Sent: 14 December 2005 16:15
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain
forests...
Chuck
PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is confidential and
intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an intended
recipient of this email please notify the sender immediately and delete your
copy from your system. You must not copy, distribute or take any further
action in reliance on it. Email is not a secure method of communication and
Nomura International plc ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by law,
accept responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness of,
or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or disabling
code in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If verification of this
email is sought then please request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated
this email: (1) is not, and should not be treated or relied upon as,
investment research; (2) contains views or opinions that are solely those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is intended
for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation, solicitation or
offer to buy or sell securities or related financial instruments. NIplc
does not provide investment services to private customers. Authorised and
regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Registered in England
no. 1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 St Martin's-le-Grand,
London, EC1A 4NP. A member of the Nomura group of companies.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| listmail
Posts:429
| | 12/20/2005 3:57 AM |
| What kind of issues did you have Mark? I have replaced literally hundreds of
DCs and maintained the names and have had no issues over the years.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 1:06 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Have fun, I have had some great experiences reusing DC names.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:48:53
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
No we are sticking with the same names and so far we have had no issues.
I make sure all records referring to the DC are removed before renaming the
new machine and running dcpromo.
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:39 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Are you going to use new netbios names for the DC's ?.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:07:52
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Appreciate the input, it verified what I had thought. But when I started
seeing if single domain, etc. well I had to ask. And yes refreshing =
dcpromo out and dcpromo on new HW.
Thanks
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Almeida Pinto,
Jorge de
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 2:15 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The IM is a domain FSMO role. SO the only concern is WITHIN the domain....
No matter what forest structure you have for each domain the following
applies:
* If all DCs in a domain are GC, there is no other choice where to put the
IM. So no issue here
* If at least other DCs in a domain (besides the IM) are not a GC, then the
IM should not be on a GC
your method will work as long as the last DC, that is not a GC, being
refreshed (do you mean re-installed?) is also the IM
cheers
Jorge
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Simpsen, Paul A.
(HSC)
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:09 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Let me ask if there is any issue with IM if all your DCs are GCs in your
domain, which is a child, but not all the DCs in the forest are GCs? We have
been refreshing our DCs and making all GCs but the IM is running on the last
one to refresh which is not a GC. We plan on transferring this role to a GC
while we refreshing the DC it currently resides on. It will be a GC when
finished. Should I/we rethink this? We are at function level 2003.
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
neil.ruston@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:47 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Really, how so?
I 'solve' it by insisting that all DCs be GCs.
neil
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ChuckGaff@xxxxxxx
Sent: 14 December 2005 16:15
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain
forests...
Chuck
PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is confidential and
intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an intended
recipient of this email please notify the sender immediately and delete your
copy from your system. You must not copy, distribute or take any further
action in reliance on it. Email is not a secure method of communication and
Nomura International plc ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by law,
accept responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness of,
or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or disabling
code in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If verification of this
email is sought then please request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated
this email: (1) is not, and should not be treated or relied upon as,
investment research; (2) contains views or opinions that are solely those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is intended
for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation, solicitation or
offer to buy or sell securities or related financial instruments. NIplc
does not provide investment services to private customers. Authorised and
regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Registered in England
no. 1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 St Martin's-le-Grand,
London, EC1A 4NP. A member of the Nomura group of companies.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| listmail
Posts:429
| | 12/20/2005 4:03 AM |
| Don't listen to Dean, he is in denial.
:o)
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dean Wells
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 9:13 PM
To: Send - AD mailing list
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Sorry about the absence ... will be back at some point in the near future.
In regards to Joe's comment, I've worked with many large organizations and haven't found this engagement to be particularly different ... just your typical slow-moving, v. large company. Joe's just happy that he's not alone and that someone else gets to feel his pain in an org. of similar size and in the same industry ;o)
--
Dean Wells
MSEtechnology
* Email: dwells@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://msetechnology.com
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:10 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
He is really busy on a contract at the moment. It should be wrapping up shortly though and after his shellshock wears off he will probably bound back into action with his perverse british humour. It has been a joy for me watching him work on that contract as it is big business trials and tribulations at its finest and it is good for all techies to occasionally experience that. I say you haven't lived until you have jumped through the hoops put in front of you in a Fortune 25 or bigger environment. I have other friends that say the same about government or military IT work. :o)
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 6:37 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Where is Dean, have not seen him on this list for weeks?
-----Original Message-----
From: "joe"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:10:38
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Yep. Basically the end result is the same, just don't agree with the phrasing much.
The best descriptions I have seen have been by Dean Wells. If you search the newsgroups and adorg archives for Dean and Infrastructure Master and Phantoms you will find some pretty in depth discussions. He even describes how to see the update objects using adfind.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of deji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 11:31 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
I don't think Joe is disagreeing with THAT point. John has the general idea, but his description/explanation is somewhat .... shall we say ......glossy.
Sincerely,
Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCT
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Scott, Anthony
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
John is right though. If all DCs are GCs, putting the IM role on a GC isn't a problem.
Thank You,
Anthony Scott
Berbee
4690 E. Fulton Dr., Bldg. C
Ada, Michigan 49301
(616) 481-9722
(616) 464-6369
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Za Vue
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:45 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Who wrote it?
************************************************************************
*************************************J
John Savill
John Savill is Director of Technical Infrastructure for Geniant. He is a
CISSP, a Security and Messaging MCSE on Windows Server 2003, a six-time MVP, and a Krav Maga instructor. He is also the author of Windows Server
2003 Active Directory Design and Implementation from Packt Publishing (http://www.packtpub.com/book/active_directory).
Email address: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
************************************************************************
*****************************************
joe wrote:
>Wow who wrote that article in the magazine? That is pretty bad.
>
>The end result is the same though as stated by everyone so far. If you
have
>a single domain there is only slight overhead if you make all DCs into
GCs.
>The only overhead I can really think of is that you will have more
global
>catalog DNS records and all DCs are listening on an extra 1-2 ports...
That
>is easily outweighed by the gain of having lots of GC availability.
>
>Not sure what space usage you would incur by NOT doing it as indicated
by
>the article. The whole IM role thing is pretty oddly described as well.
>
>
>
>
>
>
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
.ŠÿÃÅ Å Æ’²§²B§Ãƒ¶v®Å §²rz§ÃƒÅ ryýŠŠ„¢i½®
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| listmail
Posts:429
| | 12/20/2005 4:12 AM |
| I am curious myself. I
seem to recall a rumour to that effect previously but have not seen anything
substantial.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dean
WellsSent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:13 PMTo: Send -
AD mailing listSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global
Catalogs
How so?
--Dean WellsMSEtechnology* Email: dwells@msetechnology.comhttp://msetechnology.com
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
ChuckGaff@xxxxxxxSent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 8:15
AMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: Re: [ActiveDir]
Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain
forests...
Chuck | | | |
| activedirsmaporg
Posts:0
| | 12/20/2005 10:33 AM |
| Ignoring the fairly over-discussed if every DC is a GC anyway, the
Infrastructure FSMO / Master (IM) can be on GC aspect ...
In "the standard forest" (if there is such a thing) with a mix of DCs and
GCs, the Infrastructure FSMO must be on a non-GC, for both win2k and
win2k3. There has been no change here.
What you might be thinking of is the fact that we (in fact I) made it so a
win2k3 DC can perform the duties of the Domain Naming FSMO / Master even
if it is not a GC. Win2k only knowns how to perform the duties of the
Naming FSMO on a GC.
Basically the contstraints were such that for win2k these two roles
couldn't even exist on the same machine. Now they can both be held on a
non-GC as of Win2k3.
Cheers,
BrettSh [msft]
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, joe wrote:
> I am curious myself. I seem to recall a rumour to that effect previously but
> have not seen anything substantial.
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dean Wells
> Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:13 PM
> To: Send - AD mailing list
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
>
>
> How so?
> --
> Dean Wells
> MSEtechnology
> * Email: dwells @msetechnology.com
> http://msetechnology.com
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ChuckGaff@xxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 8:15 AM
> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
>
>
> The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain
> forests...
>
> Chuck
>
>
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| MThommes
Posts:73
| | 12/20/2005 11:47 AM |
| Hi joe,
If it's not too much trouble, could you list the steps you take
(including wait times) to replace a DC with the same name? I am
especially interested in how long a particularly named DC would not be
available to the AD audience. Thanks!
Mike Thommes
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 9:43 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
What kind of issues did you have Mark? I have replaced literally
hundreds of
DCs and maintained the names and have had no issues over the years.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 1:06 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Have fun, I have had some great experiences reusing DC names.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:48:53
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
No we are sticking with the same names and so far we have had no issues.
I make sure all records referring to the DC are removed before renaming
the
new machine and running dcpromo.
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:39 PM
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Are you going to use new netbios names for the DC's ?.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Simpsen, Paul A. \(HSC\)"
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:07:52
To:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Appreciate the input, it verified what I had thought. But when I started
seeing if single domain, etc. well I had to ask. And yes refreshing =
dcpromo out and dcpromo on new HW.
Thanks
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Almeida Pinto,
Jorge de
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 2:15 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The IM is a domain FSMO role. SO the only concern is WITHIN the
domain....
No matter what forest structure you have for each domain the following
applies:
* If all DCs in a domain are GC, there is no other choice where to put
the
IM. So no issue here
* If at least other DCs in a domain (besides the IM) are not a GC, then
the
IM should not be on a GC
your method will work as long as the last DC, that is not a GC, being
refreshed (do you mean re-installed?) is also the IM
cheers
Jorge
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Simpsen, Paul A.
(HSC)
Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:09 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Let me ask if there is any issue with IM if all your DCs are GCs in your
domain, which is a child, but not all the DCs in the forest are GCs? We
have
been refreshing our DCs and making all GCs but the IM is running on the
last
one to refresh which is not a GC. We plan on transferring this role to a
GC
while we refreshing the DC it currently resides on. It will be a GC when
finished. Should I/we rethink this? We are at function level 2003.
Paul
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
neil.ruston@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:47 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
Really, how so?
I 'solve' it by insisting that all DCs be GCs.
neil
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
ChuckGaff@xxxxxxx
Sent: 14 December 2005 16:15
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs
The issue with IM on GCs is solved in Windows 2003 for multi-domain
forests...
Chuck
PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is confidential and
intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an intended
recipient of this email please notify the sender immediately and delete
your
copy from your system. You must not copy, distribute or take any further
action in reliance on it. Email is not a secure method of communication
and
Nomura International plc ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by
law,
accept responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness
of,
or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or disabling
code in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If verification of
this
email is sought then please request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated
this email: (1) is not, and should not be treated or relied upon as,
investment research; (2) contains views or opinions that are solely
those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is
intended
for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation,
solicitation or
offer to buy or sell securities or related financial instruments. NIplc
does not provide investment services to private customers. Authorised
and
regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Registered in England
no. 1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 St
Martin's-le-Grand,
London, EC1A 4NP. A member of the Nomura group of companies.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
|
|