Re: Active Directory Value Proposition
- From: "SRVMAINT00" <apherson@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 01:30:32 -0600
Thanks for getting back to us, Kurt. It is reassuring, although not quite
as articulated as yours, our business case definately resonated ... and it
was good. It's nice being in a proative environment, here. We get alot of
support up and down the food change. We owe you one.
msw
"Kurt" <lorentzenkurt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:11o4b325gi45076@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Here's my evaluation based on the questions:
>
> Two or 3 computers? No way.
>
> 5 computers? If the environment is distributed enough and turnover is
> regular -- maybe.
>
> 10 computers? You bet. Even without exchange and such, central management
is
> crucial (IMHO) at this point. Passwords, remote administration, group
policy
> all play into easier management and (you mentioned how little time you
have)
> less administrative overhead. Set up properly with a (well maintained)
> default user profile, OU's if required for the distribution of policy,
> re-directed "My Documents" and "Application Settings" for archival and
> backup purposes - which leads to centralized backups (including open file
> options that work without the expense of an agent on each workstation),
> DNS-Integrated DHCP, central logon scripts --- I just wouldn't do it any
> other way. The $650.00 for S2K3 Standard will pay for itself in no time vs
> the time spent maintaining a workgroup scenario.
>
> > What would be the three chief reasons?
> 1) Central administration of accounts, permissions, and policy.
> 2) Remote administration.
> 3) Granular permissions/rights for individual users according to need.
>
> > What is your opnion of the value of Active Directory versus risks on a
one
> > to four scale (1=lowest)
>
> What are the risks? No backup? No disaster recovery plan? Are the risks
WITH
> AD really any different than WITHOUT AD - given the same lack of
planning?
> A good DC will have redundant Disks (a Mirror at the very least).
Redundant
> (or at least a cold spare) power supply. Daily backups (tape drive or some
> kind of NAS). If you really want to protect yourself from downtime, put up
a
> second DC. It doesn't have to be as robust as the "big one", and it'll
keep
> you going if the main one dies, plus it'll make AD restoration a breeze.
>
> I don't see a lot of gray area here. Either you're in need of a central op
> or you're not. Once you cross the line, I'd say your main consideration is
> not risk vs reward, but more cost vs reward (and selling the reward vs
cost
> to the folks who control the $$). You'll need a server, server OS, and
> plenty of time to join workstations, transfer user account settings from
> local to AD accounts. There's lots of planning. Obviously, you dont' want
> everybody to be a domain admin. What about local admin? Everybody? Or just
a
> few? What are the software ramifications (of apps you are currently
running
> and will keep) ? Do you need to set up a test environment? What are the
> associated costs of that? If you're not migrating from something else, the
> danger of rendering your network unusable is fairly low as long as you're
> bringing up a NEW server as the DC (HIGHLY recommended ! ). You can always
> log into the local accounts even after you've joined the domain, and the
> old permissions and such will still be valid. After the domain is fully
> functional and all of the bugs have been ousted you can delete all the
local
> accounts (one at a time, making sure nothing breaks as a result).
>
> ...kurt
>
>
> "SRVMAINT00" <apherson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:bgagf.62$SA4.4628@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Thank-you for responding, Kurt. It isn't so much a matter of capacity,
> > but
> > time. Personally, I have decades of time-in-grade, however have had
more
> > of
> > a large infrastructure view, this Global Directory Services and so on
are
> > driven differently as a matter of scale. I have been unable to get a
firm
> > handle on whether a small-scale slapd/slurpd would be better or worse as
> > we
> > begin several projects in this regard.
> >
> > Let me put it another way; how about three questions?
> >
> > Would you recommend using Active Directory in a small-business setting?
> > What would be the three chief reasons?
> > What is your opnion of the value of Active Directory versus risks on a
one
> > to four scale (1=lowest)
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > "Kurt" <lorentzenkurt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:11nvjq0g47g2650@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Unfortunately there really isn't a "general" answer to your question.
If
> > you
> >> don't have the personnel in-house that can make that kind of
assessment,
> > you
> >> really should consider a consultant. There are just too many variables
to
> >> begin even the broadest of estimates.
> >>
> >> ...kurt
> >>
> >>
> >> "Joseph G. Earl" <apherson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >> news:10Off.75$_q4.2734@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> > Generally speaking, what is the Value Proposition for early
> >> > adoption/deployment of Active Directory in terms of best
> > practices/savings
> >> > in planning an initially small environment: One that is scalable as
> >> > well
> >> > as
> >> > offering users and counterparties more utility/functional breadth not
> >> > possible otherwise.
> >> >
> >> > Thanx.
> >> >
> >> > Rapid Planning Hopeful
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
.
- References:
- Active Directory Value Proposition
- From: Joseph G. Earl
- Re: Active Directory Value Proposition
- From: Kurt
- Re: Active Directory Value Proposition
- From: SRVMAINT00
- Re: Active Directory Value Proposition
- From: Kurt
- Active Directory Value Proposition
- Prev by Date: group policy error - cant edit
- Next by Date: Re: Web based password reset
- Previous by thread: Re: Active Directory Value Proposition
- Next by thread: Re: Saving to the desktop
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
