Re: Split Domain into 2 domains

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

I would agree with you that as long as they are 100% disconnected this will
work. I not sure the not talk and completely disconnected are well defined
here. If both are running on the same WAN/LAN and aren't firewalled he will
have troubles.

--


Paul Bergson MCT, MCSE, MCSA, CNE, CNA, CCA

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.


"Gautam Anand" <GautamAnand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:A063D477-B817-493B-A121-912707C56BC1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Once you do a meta data cleanup on both the sites for the other site DCs,
> there is no reason they would need to talk again. Plus you did say you are
> going to severe the connection between both sites.
>
> Perfectly good solution. The AD wouldnt have any issues.
> Pls make sure to add appropriately placed GCs else exchange is going to
> take
> a hit. Cant say anything about the Share Point server though.
> You could try doing a repro of the same scenario. Virtualize it... works
> best for me!
> good luck!
>
>
>
>
> "Paul Bergson" wrote:
>
>> Bad idea. Both would then have the exact same GUID. They would probably
>> end up blowing up once the dc's from the two seperate sites ever got to
>> talk
>> to one another. We did something like this but it was because we sold
>> off a
>> company and we firewalled it off once sold and the two were never able to
>> talk to each other again.
>>
>> Your client would be much better served to have a new domain created and
>> then use ADMT and migrate those users that need to be in the new domain.
>> Each domain could be at the root of its own domain in the same forest but
>> have different name spaces.
>>
>> The link below could give you an idea on how to get started. It speaks
>> of
>> 2000 to 2003 migration but it will also go 2000 to 2000 or 2003 to 2003.
>>
>> http://www.petri.co.il/active_directory_migration_tool_usage_w2k_windows_2003.htm
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Paul Bergson MCT, MCSE, MCSA, CNE, CNA, CCA
>>
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>>
>>
>> "Aaron Lister" <baduser1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:epDlclteFHA.2420@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Hi all, I have an interesting situation where a customer has 1 domain
>> > spread
>> > across 2 sites, and wishes to split the Domain (only domain in the
>> > forest)
>> > into 2 seperate domains (1 at each site). They do not need to talk to
>> > each
>> > other after the split is complete.
>> >
>> > The Servers in the domain look something like this:
>> > 4 AD Servers (2 at each site)
>> > 6 Exchange Servers (3 at each site)
>> > 2 Sharepoint Servers (both at site B)
>> > 1 SQL Server (at site A)
>> > 1 Web Server (at site A)
>> >
>> > I was thinking that maybe we could just:
>> > 1. Add a new DNS Server (so that there is one in each site)
>> > 2. Sever the connection between each site
>> > 3. Sieze the AD roles on the site that does not have the original
>> > server
>> > holding the roles (the one currently with the roles will not be
>> > reintroduced
>> > to this site)
>> > 4. Repair AD by removing the redundant servers from each site by doing
>> > a
>> > metadata cleanup.
>> > 5. Re-configure the DNS servers so that they are both masters in their
>> > own
>> > domain
>> >
>> > Essentially, we will end up with 2 domains with the same name, and
>> > structure, but in completely different locations that do not talk to
>> > each
>> > other. We could rename a domain as well, but I'm not sure if that is
>> > at
>> > all
>> > required
>> >
>> > I would be looking at investigating what the consequences would be for
>> > the
>> > Exchange and Sharepoint Servers as well, but havn't quite got that far
>> > down
>> > the track.
>> >
>> > Is this an ok solution, or is there a better way (especially since
>> > there
>> > are
>> > Exchange and Sharepoint Servers in the midst)?
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Aaron
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Forest Separation
    ... Exchange 2000 organisation within the forest with multiple exchange servers in child domains, each child its own exchange admin group. ... ChildA does not share the same DNS name space as the forest root and we need to keep the DNS name of ChildA the same so migration does not look practical. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory)
  • Re: POP3 Connector undisclosed recipients
    ... >connector. ... Also most of the newer email servers like ... No, cost is what I wind up paying for amortized hardware costs, ... >> unoptimized Exchange servers. ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.admin)
  • Re: W2003 DC in a 2000 Native AD
    ... but you never mentioned if you have Exchange. ... I have an article on upgrading your forest ... Select articles and click on Upgrade your Forest ... All the other W2000 DC servers will not be updated now, ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory)
  • Re: How to host email using Exchange 2003
    ... > You Own SMTP Mail using Exchange 2000" and think the instructions will ... So their DNS your company is using is Internet "facing". ... record specific Emails servers. ... The ISP DNS servers will do the job of sending Internet mails out. ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.setup)
  • Re: SBS2003 + Exchange smtp causing internet problems
    ... servers can agree on a protocol which doesn't result in the attachment being ... sending such files eats up your Exchange ... you need to look into getting a separate FTP ... > to authenticate who is downloading it. ...
    (microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000)