Re: Help with setting up Sites.
- From: "Herb Martin" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 13:33:59 -0600
"Michael" <admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:en3a5G8RHHA.4260@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks for the prompt really. Glad to see i've not really missed the
general idea of it again this time.
I guess it should be quite easy seeing as though all servers at Site A are
on one vlan and all workstations are on another vlan.
And the same for Site B - yet theirs are different.
Therefore defining the subnets should be quite easy?
It is practically trivial to define the subnets. If a site has a large
number of
subnets then it makes sense to use subnet summarization (aka supernetting
or route summarization in other contexts.)
There should be no downtime at all should there for anything. If a server
is on the wrong subnet then it will just authenticate with another site DC
i guess - until we can change its address?
Yes, and they are already doing that (inefficiently) now.
I'll try and answer the questions you asked as well below:
I do agree that most of what i am doing will be a formality but we do
envisage growth and so another physical site and data centre in a few
years is not out of the question.
Thus the advice to go ahead and do it fully.
So how many Domains do you have? [And why more than one with so few
people and locations?]
Forest Root Domain
Domain A
(Domain B - almost got rid of this now and not inlcuding it in any
conversations as it is gone really) - I will delete all this before i set
the sites/subnets up.
Domain C - A hosting domain for other companies. I want to get this in a
seperate forest really if i can plan some down time -again - this will be
done first.
Stupid and too many i know - hence why i wish to sort it out now.
Is there a problem with making every DC a GC? I don't understand why every
DC in every company is not a GC - what is the disadvtange? I will indeed
make every one of ours a GC before i start.
The disadvantage would be if you have LARGE domains making the forest
wide burden of replication much larger. With empty and tiny domains there
is no negative.
A bit about adding secondary DCs to each site (So 2 on site A and 2 on
site B) - I agree with what you say about this being overkill and i
probably wont
I didn't say it was overkill unless you don't need that level of fault
tolerance.
Some people need and can afford it; others do not and cannot.
bother to do it (just we have the hardware left over so thought i would
ask the question). You say that it could imporve performance for local
users if they can authenticate against either DC at that site - how does
this work exactly?
Once sites, subnets, sitelinks are setup correctly, and DCs are all in the
correct
sites the clients will attempt to authenticate FIRST with DCs of that
particular
site.
DCs will replicate quickly within a site, and use the parameters set by the
admin
to replicate in a controlled manner between sites (only one pair of DCs will
replicate at Scheduled times at Frequency intervals between the nearest,
based
on cost, sites.)
Could i therefore have:
Site A - respresenting physical site B
[Assume you mean "physical site A".]
DC01 (GC)
ADC01 (GC)
ADotherDC03 (GC)
Sure.
Site B- respresenting physical site B
DC02(GC)
ADC02(GC)
ADotherDC04 (GC)
Sure.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Help with setting up Sites.
- From: Michael
- Re: Help with setting up Sites.
- References:
- Help with setting up Sites.
- From: Michael
- Re: Help with setting up Sites.
- From: Herb Martin
- Re: Help with setting up Sites.
- From: Michael
- Help with setting up Sites.
- Prev by Date: Re: Help with setting up Sites.
- Next by Date: Re: Help with setting up Sites.
- Previous by thread: Re: Help with setting up Sites.
- Next by thread: Re: Help with setting up Sites.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
