Re: Advice on site topology

You need to download the Rendom toolkit, which contains the documentation
you need. If you have one domain its not so bad. It has risks if you get it
wrong. Another way to do it would be to create a new forest and migrate
existing users. It really depends. If you only need one domain, a rename
would get you out of the inflexibility created by the forest name
originally. If you need two separate domains or forests, you might consider
ditching the existing and migrating to a new forest.
Anthony

"Richard Passey" <r.passey@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eGLr4zXtGHA.3240@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Anthony you raise some excellent points, many of which I had considered.

I think renaming the domain woulkd be the way to go. The problem with my
current domain name is that it refers to closley to our organisation, the
new organisation would not "politically" like to be logging to what they
would see as a separate entity.

How simple is it to rename a domain, I've not looked into it. My domain is
fully wn2003/exc2003 at functional level "Windows Server 2003".

"Anthony" <anthony.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eXmHjLXtGHA.3912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I think you need to forget buildings and networks and think about how the
two organisations are related to each other. The only relevance of the
high speed network is that you can locate servers for all users in either
building. The more the organisations have in common, the more they should
be in one domain perhaps in separate OU's. The less they have in common,
the more they should be in a different forest, joined by a Trust.
You need to explore a bit more what the requirements are.
- Will all users be in the same address book for e-mail, or separate
address books?
- Do you require separate security policies for the two organisations?
For example, is one of them pretty relaxed about passwords and the other
obsessive about security? Will you have one logical firewall to the
Internet or two?
- Might the two organisations become separate again in a few years?
- Can you implement the same user policies regarding the use of IT
equipment in both places?
Mostly you should start from the assumption of one domain, and work out
what essential requirements can not be met that way. Bad reasons for
separate domains are:
* the logon box
* IT people wanting to do their own thing
Your forest name was too specific when it was created in the past. It
should be as generic as possible to refer to the entity that is your
organisation. So now, it does not seem right for people in BuildingB to
be logging onto a domain called BuildingA. But lets imagine the domain
was actually called 123. Would users in BuildingB still object to logging
onto domain 123? If not, then you need to do a domain rename to get out
of a problem that was created in the past.
If you have specific requirements for the two organisations that are
different, people here will be able to tell you whether they can be
implemented on one domain or forest, or not.
Anthony




"Richard Passey" <r.passey@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23qazBQUtGHA.4968@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sorry there was a typo:

Dear All,

I would appreciate some advice on the best way to expand my domain.

1) We are taking over a new building, it's local and we have fibre links
to
it. We therefore have the option of running the two networks on the same
physical network.

2) The "powers that be" would like services (Exchange, fileshares,
software)
from building A (where we are now,
buildingA.organisation1.mothercompany.co.uk) to be accessable in
building B, ie user A can go to building B and logon.

3) The "powers that be" would like building B to be distinct. Ie users
should see the domain there as being called
buildingB.organisation2.mothercompany.co.uk.

4) Our forest is currently called
buildingA.organisation1.mothercompany.co.uk. The new building will be
housing a separate organisation. When we designed the domain we planned
for
new buildings but not new oranisatons under our control.


The main questions are:

Would two separate Domains with Exchange run properly on the same
physical
network?
-Then could I join the sites to share services?

Would it be best to have distinct networks and domains and link them in
some
way?

Is there some other way of organising this??




"Richard Passey" <r.passey@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%233XzXMUtGHA.3264@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dear All,

I would appreciate some advice on the best way to expand my domain.

1) We are taking over a new building, it's local and we have fibre
links to it. We therefore have the option of running the two networks
on the same physical network.

2) The "powers that be" would like services (Exchange, fileshares,
software) from building A (where we are now,
buildingA.organisation1.mothercompany.co.uk) to have services in
building B.

3) The "powers that be" would like building B to be distinct. Ie users
should see the domain there as being called
buildingB.organisation2.mothercompany.co.uk.

4) Our forest is currently called
buildingA.organisation1.mothercompany.co.uk. The new building will be
housing a separate organisation. When we designed the domain we planned
for new buildings but not new oranisatons under our control.


The main questions are:

Would two separate Domains with Exchange run properly on the same
physical network?
-Then could I join the sites to share services?

Would it be best to have distinct networks and domains and link them in
some way?

Is there some other way of organising this??











.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Advice on site topology
    ... speed network is that you can locate servers for all users in either ... be in one domain perhaps in separate OU's. ... Your forest name was too specific when it was created in the past. ... Would it be best to have distinct networks and domains and link them in ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Advice on site topology
    ... I think you need to forget buildings and networks and think about how the ... in one domain perhaps in separate OU's. ... Your forest name was too specific when it was created in the past. ... Would it be best to have distinct networks and domains and link them in ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • RE: Secure Network Design (DMZ, LAN, etc)
    ... You can't have separate subnets separated by a switch. ... is only because the firewall is going to be doing NAT in addition to ... > Subject: Re: Secure Network Design ...
    (Security-Basics)
  • RE: Secure Network Design (DMZ, LAN, etc)
    ... webservers acting as routers so that they can get to your databases on ... then why have a separate network? ... interface on your internal firewall which protects the innermost network ... switch. ...
    (Security-Basics)
  • Re: Changing Domain Name
    ... VPN connections have been severed, and the sellers AD objects, as far as I ... I USED to be a network admin for a few years but have found ... > You HAVE to set up a new forest for the buyer and migrate the appropriate ... to this new forest. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.setup)