Re: Active Directory Upgrade

;-))

--

Cheers,
(HOPEFULLY THIS INFORMATION HELPS YOU!)

# Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services

BLOG (WEB-BASED)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx
BLOG (RSS-FEEDS)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/rss.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties and confers no rights!
* Always test before implementing!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#################################################
#################################################
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Jorge Silva" <jorgesilva_pt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:uwpl8DMkGHA.1000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
very true! but not in his case as he has w2k DCs and not NT4 DCs

don't get me wrong...
I wasn't trying to undone what you said, I was just trying to complement
the info that you provided :)


--
I hope that the information above helps you

Good Luck
Jorge Silva
MCSA
Systems Administrator

"Jorge de Almeida Pinto [MVP]"
<SubstituteThisWithMyFullNameSeparatedByDots@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:uo$nw$LkGHA.1276@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
very true! but not in his case as he has w2k DCs and not NT4 DCs

--

Cheers,
(HOPEFULLY THIS INFORMATION HELPS YOU!)

# Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services

BLOG (WEB-BASED)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx
BLOG (RSS-FEEDS)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/rss.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties and confers no
rights!
* Always test before implementing!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#################################################
#################################################
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Jorge Silva" <jorgesilva_pt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Oy8malLkGHA.4828@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi

LVR is only available at FFL w2k3! (for DCs and GCs)

Linked-Value Replication is also available in Windows 2003 Interim
Functional Level

--
I hope that the information above helps you

Good Luck
Jorge Silva
MCSA
Systems Administrator

"Jorge de Almeida Pinto [MVP]"
<SubstituteThisWithMyFullNameSeparatedByDots@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:urjRuRLkGHA.1508@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I've already fixed the Exchange 2000 schema
problem, and the domain will be running with only Win2k3 DCs by the
time E2k3
is introduced into the domain.

the PAS will be changed as soon as you update the schema with the e2k3
schema stuff, without even having e2k3 servers!

One question I do have is about LVR. Without the forest at
FFL w2k3,
will the current w2k3 DCs use LVR while talking to each other, when
replicating the GC? I think that's what you said.

LVR is only available at FFL w2k3! (for DCs and GCs)

GC replication (concerning the PAS thing!) in whatever FL:
w2k3 --> w2k3: partial GC rebuild
w2k --> w2k3: full GC rebuild
w2k3 --> w2k: full GC rebuild
w2k --> w2k: full GC rebuild


--

Cheers,
(HOPEFULLY THIS INFORMATION HELPS YOU!)

# Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services

BLOG (WEB-BASED)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx
BLOG (RSS-FEEDS)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/rss.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties and confers no
rights!
* Always test before implementing!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#################################################
#################################################
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Tom" <Tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:56035149-6584-46BB-96FD-DD917B6BAD47@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Jorge,

Thanks for your help. I've already fixed the Exchange 2000
schema
problem, and the domain will be running with only Win2k3 DCs by the
time E2k3
is introduced into the domain.
One question I do have is about LVR. Without the forest at FFL
w2k3,
will the current w2k3 DCs use LVR while talking to each other, when
replicating the GC? I think that's what you said.

Thanks again,

Tom
--
When eveythings coming at you at once, you're in the wrong lane.


"Jorge de Almeida Pinto [MVP]" wrote:

Can I put the 2 domains I'm upgrading into "Windows Server 2003"
mode?

Yes.... however in w2k3 it is not called mode anymore. you have
domain
functional levels (DFL) and forest functional levels. (FFL)
so to answer again: yes you can put each domain with ONLY w2k3 DCs
into DFL
w2k3 while others remain in lower DFL.
you can increase the FFL to w2k3 when ALL DCs are w2k3
see: http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=322692

One of the domains being upgraded is the root of the forest, and
the
other is
a child domain including Exchange 2000 and most other business
machines.

if you first update the schema with the w2k3 stuff first, make sure
you fix
the schema prior to that!
if you first update the schema with the e2k3 stuff first then you can
update
the schema with the w2k3 stuff without fixing it. the e2k3 schema
update
fixes the inetorg issue automatically.

However, be aware that e2k3 updates the partial attribute set and w2k
GCs
will rebuild!

also
see:http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/archive/2005/11/19/110.aspx

Do I get the benefit of better replication of GC with only 2
domains in
"Windows 2003 Server" mode, or do I need the whole forest in
"Windows 2003
Server" mode?

you will get linked value replication (LVR) when the FFL is at w2k3
(thus
only w2k3 dcs)

better GC replication is only accomplished when BOTH the source DC
(currently holding info) and the destination DC (wanting the info)
are
w2k3!!!
in all other cases a GC full rebuild will occur!
w2k3 --> w2k3: partial GC rebuild
w2k --> w2k3: full GC rebuild
w2k3 --> w2k: full GC rebuild
w2k --> w2k: full GC rebuild


--

Cheers,
(HOPEFULLY THIS INFORMATION HELPS YOU!)

# Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services

BLOG (WEB-BASED)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx
BLOG (RSS-FEEDS)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/rss.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties and confers no
rights!
* Always test before implementing!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#################################################
#################################################
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Tom" <Tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:5BFFD6FB-25B3-4F03-997A-50FF7B402B7E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I am upgrading a couple of Domains in our forest to Windows
2003. This
is a single forest, 5 domain model. There will be 3 domains
remaining in
Windows 2000 native mode.
Can I put the 2 domains I'm upgrading into "Windows Server
2003"
mode?
One of the domains being upgraded is the root of the forest, and
the other
is
a child domain including Exchange 2000 and most other business
machines.
Exchange 2000 will be migrated to Exchange 2003 after the domain
upgrades.
Do I get the benefit of better replication of GC with only 2
domains
in
"Windows 2003 Server" mode, or do I need the whole forest in
"Windows 2003
Server" mode?
I have a little confusion between domain function levels and
forest
function levels. There are obviously going to be Windows 2000 DCs
in our
forest, but the 2 domains being upgraded will be all 2003 DCs.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Tom
--
When eveythings coming at you at once, you're in the wrong lane.













.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Branch Office DC Best Practice
    ... letting ordinary users/admins logon to DCs, ... # Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services ... BLOG --> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx ... he has control of the other DCs ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Multi domain administration
    ... for a small environment as yours (2 DCs) I would be very ... # Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services ... BLOG --> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx ... account in each and reloging each time from my workstation. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Active Directory Upgrade
    ... # Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services ... the PAS will be changed as soon as you update the schema with the e2k3 ... LVR is only available at FFL w2k3! ... (for DCs and GCs) ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Moving First DC in Forest
    ... # Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services ... BLOG --> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx ... use the W2K3 SP1 CD! ... introduce w2k3 DCs ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: strange AD behavior need help!
    ... # Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services ... BLOG --> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx ... if yo only have 1 AD domain make all DCs a GC! ... add a user it said something about uniqueness. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory)
Loading