AD design question
- From: "Ron Grove" <rgrove@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 09:26:35 -0800
We're a fairly distributed company migrating from NT 4 domains at each of
our buildings to one AD domain (there are 20 locations). There's no more
than ~50 users at any of the buildings, but most only have 5-20 users tops.
I see the Microsoft documentation recommends having a subdomain in the
forest rather than just using the base domain. In other words:
contoso.com (enterprise admins etc only are here)
|
concorp.contoso.com (all user accts etc go here)
As with about everyone, we're way low on funds and I'd rather not have to do
this because it would require more servers that are doing literally nothing.
I don't see any reason the company would ever need to create a complex tree
of domains. New buildings will probably never have more than 20 users and
the ones with up to 50 may even get sold (for other completely unrelated
reasons) in the near to mid-term. We'd rather just do contoso.com and leave
it at that. Are there any practical issues that would result from that
decision? Needing new domains, etc, is an obvious consequence, so is the
fact that enterprise admins is meaninigless at that point. I'm looking for
non-obvious consequences that would necessitate the expenses for at least
two more domain controllers for the root domain that in the end does nothing
day to day for us, and then all of the domain controllers we'll have in the
real domain where all the action is.
Thank you in advance for your time and consideration,
Ron
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: AD design question
- From: Danny Sanders
- Re: AD design question
- Prev by Date: Re: Active Directory and laptops
- Next by Date: Re: AD design question
- Previous by thread: Re: Active Directory and laptops
- Next by thread: Re: AD design question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|