Re: SMS Across 2 Forests
From: Stan White [MS] (stanwh_at_microsoft.com)
Date: 07/19/04
- Next message: Mark Scott [MSFT]: "Re: Desparetly seeking tech. info"
- Previous message: matt: "Re: SMS Across 2 Forests"
- In reply to: matt: "Re: SMS Across 2 Forests"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 09:28:13 -0700
One SLP at the central site should be fine so long as all clients can
resolve the URL to the SLP.
-- -- Stan [MSFT] -- -- This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. -- -- "matt" <matt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:981509B2-9EC7-4BEC-A20D-2F970E198A54@microsoft.com... > Hey Stan, > Thank you for providing these details and verifying this. I will now need > to place a primary site server with default MP in my other forest. Will I > be ok with one SLP in my central site even though it exist in the other > forest? Thanks for your help. > > Thank You, > -Matt > > "Stan White [MS]" wrote: > >> Please see comments inline >> >> -- >> -- >> Stan [MSFT] >> -- >> -- >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no >> rights. >> -- >> -- >> >> "matt" <matt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:1B6AAB8C-4B00-4594-9B33-96166B51E04D@microsoft.com... >> > Hey Stan, >> > Thanks for the reply but i had a few additional questions. >> > - What kind of user account do I need to specify for the address >> > account? >> > A regular Domain User account? >> You have to specify a Windows user account that can be authenticated >> on >> the destination site server. It does not matter what domain either site >> is >> in as long as you can add the account being used to the local >> SMS_SiteToSiteConnection_<SiteCode> group on the destination site server >> and it can be authenticated there. Site to site communications will work >> just fine. >> >> > - I have an external forest two way trust between the two forests and >> > the >> > forest trust is Windows 2003 interm functional level. Does this change >> > anything? >> It just allows you more flexibilty in where the address accounts can be >> created and authenticated. You can also create addresses to child primary >> SMS 2.0 sites in remote domains running NT4 but the account needs to >> exist >> on the remote NT4 domain or site server. >> >> > - In a lab environment, i mimiced my two forests with the same trust >> > and >> > functional level. I also created an account with the same name and >> > pasword >> > in both forests and used that as my client push installation account. >> > Needless to say I got discovery to work for both forests and my >> > advanced >> > client installed. how can this be if another primary sit is needed in >> > the >> > other forest? Could you possibly explain the reasoning for this? >> >> You can push to any machine if you provide an account and password the >> machine will accept as a local admin. In fact, although not supported >> until >> SP1 you can even push to workgroup clients if the same account and >> password >> exist on each machine that is specified as the client push account. When >> you >> push and specify a network access account, the client uses that account >> to >> download the client.msi and proceeds to install, regardless of the logged >> on >> user or domain membership of the machine. Where you get into trouble is >> publishing and querying objects in AD for roaming/server location, site >> assignment, etc. You may be falling back to WINS for some of that as >> well. >> >> There is a big difference between getting the client initially installed >> and >> getting proxy MP's, DP's, software distribution, content location and >> roaming to work properly in this type of environment. >> >> >> > Thanks for your assistance, >> > -matt >> > >> > "Stan White [MS]" wrote: >> > >> >> Machine accounts cannot span forests in Windows 2000 or on Windows >> >> Server >> >> 2003 running in 'Windows 2000 compatibility mode' >> >> So, yes, you will need a primary site in the other forest and will >> >> need >> >> to >> >> specify user accounts in the addresses regardless of the security >> >> mode. >> >> -- >> >> -- >> >> Stan [MSFT] >> >> -- >> >> -- >> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no >> >> rights. >> >> -- >> >> -- >> >> >> >> "matt" <matt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> >> news:E114CF8E-5CC1-4D2B-AAC6-86E6E9CCCB53@microsoft.com... >> >> > Hello Everyone, >> >> > I've read the following information in the CPDG and I need some >> >> > clarification on it. Does the below indicate that I will need a site >> >> > server in each of my forest(if a secondary, then an address with >> >> > rights >> >> > to >> >> > the other forest, if a primary, then no address with rights to the >> >> > other >> >> > forest) ? Or will I be ok without? I did not plan my sms site >> >> > hierarchy >> >> > based on forests, but rather network connectivity and link speeds. >> >> > Now >> >> > I've discovered there are two forests and I am concerned that I will >> >> > need >> >> > to place a primary site to support machines in the other forests >> >> > rather >> >> > then none. Can anyone help clarify this? >> >> > >> >> > Site-to-site communications >> >> > Site-to-site communications have limitations across forests. A child >> >> > primary site in one forest can attach to a parent in a different >> >> > forest. A >> >> > child secondary site cannot attach to a parent in a different >> >> > forest. >> >> > Data >> >> > is sent up the hierarchy from a child primary site to its parent >> >> > site. >> >> > For >> >> > site-to-site communications to work, the SMS addresses at the >> >> > sending >> >> > site >> >> > must have access to the receiving site and vice-versa. If one or >> >> > more >> >> > of >> >> > the forests is running in Windows 2000 Active Directory mixed mode >> >> > or >> >> > if >> >> > Windows Server 2003 Active Directory is using the interim domain >> >> > functional level, you must specify user accounts >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
- Next message: Mark Scott [MSFT]: "Re: Desparetly seeking tech. info"
- Previous message: matt: "Re: SMS Across 2 Forests"
- In reply to: matt: "Re: SMS Across 2 Forests"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
