Re: 2003 AD R2 schema upgrade from Win 2000 Server?

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

Good luck...

--
I hope that the information above helps you.
Have a Nice day.

Jorge Silva
MCSE, MVP Directory Services
"jimmuh" <jimmuh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:9321CB98-2E17-45BD-BCB5-6C3C32C10BAE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi, Jorge.

No, I'm not doing this just for grins. The one R2 feature that I really need
on this domain is the changes in DFS. It should be really helpful for the
application that we run on the domain. But we can't implement the new DFS
until we have at least one R2 server up and running in each of the three
sites. So I thought I'd get the schema upgraded, and then tackle the task of
adding those servers. I don't have much choice, really. The production
schedule rules all. I have to get the domain ready to take on R2 DCs, and
then add them as the production schedule permits.

Makes me wistful about the good old days when you ran a big network with one
piece of big iron. Upgrades were pretty danged simple back them. I'm not a
professional IT guy, so the organizational requirements for this sort of
thing with Windows have me wondering why the vendors of this software choose
Windows as their platform. I know the development tools are outstanding. I
guess that's the answer. The guys who developed this software -- believe me
-- are not good developers. They need all the help they can get!

And so do I!

;-)

Thank you for your help.

"Jorge Silva" wrote:

My Opinion is... If you don't plan to use R2 features, don't upgrade the
schema to R2, you only need to upgrade the schema to R2 when you plan to use
R2 features.
--
I hope that the information above helps you.
Have a Nice day.

Jorge Silva
MCSE, MVP Directory Services
"jimmuh" <jimmuh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:01F705B7-74CF-43BD-B9DF-14F1F19081BE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Thanks, Jorge. Yes, I had seen that message thread.
>
> So, do you see any problem with me proceeding as I outlined?
>
> I'm not intending to do any upgrade installations of R2 on any of the
> machines. This domain was in sad, sad shape when I got it. I had to > edit
> AD
> manually to take care of issues like DCs that had just been yanked out > of
> the
> network. I changed the configuration of the domain slowly over time to > do
> my
> best to provide redundant functionality. It is in perfect condition > now,
> with
> no replication or DNS issues -- passing dcdiag, netdiag, and replmon
> testing
> with no failures or warnings whatsoever.
>
> This is an actual production plant domain, and a downed server means a
> site
> stops producing -- not a popular option. We have two servers each at > two
> of
> the sites, and only a single server at the third site. No test > machines,
> other than what I can jury rig in the way of virtual machines on my own
> notebook computer.
>
> With the history of the domain I want clean installations of R2 for > each
> of
> the DCs. I'll be adding a sixth DC (2nd server at the site that only > has
> one
> now). So I just want to upgrade the schema now from the W2KSP4 system I
> was
> talking about, then add the first R2 DC, then remove each of the other > DCs
> in
> turn from the domain and clean install the OS on them before adding > them
> back.
>
> The IT people here probably think I'm crazy for doing this, but their
> servers can go down with very little effect on company operations (loss > of
> e-mail, network shares, etc.) -- and they do go down. None of my > servers
> has
> ever gone down for other than a frank hardware failure, and those > failures
> are long in the past. If my servers go down, buildings become eerily
> quiet,
> and stuff stops coming off the production lines.
>
> The company will not spend the money they should to provide a separate, > or
> at least a bolstered, infrastructure for the production domain. It > shares
> infrastructure with a bunch of sales reps and customer service reps who
> actually get to run their own server -- with no training or oversight > on
> security settings! The company wouldn't even buy more than one > production
> server per site, or air conditioning for the rooms the servers were > in -- > until a hot day spelled the end of operations at one ofl the sites for > a
> couple of days.
>
> If you've read all of this and can respond to that primary question, I
> thank
> you. I have no education in this field, other that what I've picked up > on
> my
> own on the job in a couple of years. I appreciate any help I can get.
>
> "Jorge Silva" wrote:
>
>> also have a look at the previous post "Windows 2003 R2 and SP2"
>>
>> -- >> I hope that the information above helps you.
>> Have a Nice day.
>>
>> Jorge Silva
>> MCSE, MVP Directory Services
>> "jimmuh" <jimmuh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:EC3D54D6-A232-4982-9916-38F0A67B8BFC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > On second thought, I have seen nothing here that indicates that I >> > have
>> > to
>> > do
>> > the schema upgrades from the W2003SP2 machine. Paul and Jorge seem >> > to
>> > be
>> > trying to remind me that the new R2 features can't be installed on >> > the
>> > older
>> > W2KSP4 system. But, if I'm understanding it correctly, the AD schema
>> > can
>> > still be extended without doing it on the W2003SP2 DC. I can add the >> > R2
>> > features to other servers later on as the servers become available >> > and
>> > as
>> > the
>> > features are needed.
>> >
>> > I have reasons for wanting to do this from the W2KSP4 box which is >> > now
>> > the
>> > FSMO role holder. That single W2003SP2 system is the only DC and SQL
>> > server
>> > at its site. I don't want to have to disconnect it, thus bringing
>> > production
>> > to a stop at its site, in order to do the schema upgrades. Once I >> > get
>> > the
>> > schema upgrades done I'll be able to add a second DC at that site
>> > (running
>> > W2003R2SP2), eliminating the risk of running a single server at that
>> > site.
>> > Then I'll be able to go on my merry way demoting each of the other
>> > servers,
>> > in turn, and doing clean installations of W2003R2SP2 on them, and >> > then
>> > adding
>> > them back to the domain.
>> >
>> > Does anyone see a problem with that plan?
>> >
>> > "jimmuh" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Thanks. I'll do it that way then. I was just concerned because I >> >> saw a
>> >> post
>> >> earlier on in which someone stated that he had been unable to >> >> install
>> >> the
>> >> schema upgrades from a 2003 SP2 server. But it they're supposed to
>> >> work
>> >> from
>> >> SP1 and onward, I'll just hope that his was an isolated instance.
>> >>
>> >> "Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > What he is telling you is to upgrade to R2 you need to do it from >> >> > a
>> >> > DC
>> >> > running Windows 2003 with SP1 or greater.
>> >> >
>> >> > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/912309
>> >> >
>> >> > R2 features are only available on R2 installed machines.
>> >> >
>> >> > -- >> >> > Paul Bergson
>> >> > MVP - Directory Services
>> >> > MCT, MCSE, MCSA, Security+, BS CSci
>> >> > 2003, 2000 (Early Achiever), NT
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.pbbergs.com
>> >> >
>> >> > Please no e-mails, any questions should be posted in the >> >> > NewsGroup
>> >> > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers >> >> > no
>> >> > rights.
>> >> >
>> >> > "jimmuh" <jimmuh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >> > news:6E694E2D-1737-4EE9-BAE4-DE9151D926E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > > Thanks for replying, Jorge. I know I'm being a bit dense, but I
>> >> > > want
>> >> > > to
>> >> > > get
>> >> > > this right. I'm no IT pro, but I'm in charge of a production
>> >> > > domain.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > So, if I try to upgrade the schema from the Windows 2000 server
>> >> > > and
>> >> > > then
>> >> > > add
>> >> > > R2 servers they will not have the features of the new schema
>> >> > > available to
>> >> > > them? If so, then I should move the FSMO roles to the Windows
>> >> > > Server
>> >> > > 2003
>> >> > > system? (It is at SP2.)
>> >> > >
>> >> > > "Jorge Silva" wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> Hi
>> >> > >> R2 is only available for W2k3 with SP1, you can apply on a >> >> > >> mixed
>> >> > >> environment
>> >> > >> where you have 2000 and 2003 but R2 features can only be
>> >> > >> installed
>> >> > >> in a
>> >> > >> server with w2k3SP1, and the R2 features are only available to
>> >> > >> the
>> >> > >> server.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> -- >> >> > >> I hope that the information above helps you.
>> >> > >> Have a Nice day.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Jorge Silva
>> >> > >> MCSE, MVP Directory Services
>> >> > >> "jimmuh" <jimmuh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >> > >> news:08A351A6-3155-4F9A-B722-C63B1DD1FDD3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > >> > Hi,
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Question up front, partial background to follow:
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > In a domain with a mixed (2000 / 2003) DC complement, is it
>> >> > >> > okay
>> >> > >> > to
>> >> > >> > perform
>> >> > >> > the schema upgrade for R2 on a Windows 2000 server which is >> >> > >> > the
>> >> > >> > current
>> >> > >> > FSMO
>> >> > >> > role holder / PDC emulator?
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > I have an oddball production environment, as follows:
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > 5 DCs located in three sites.
>> >> > >> > 1 DC is Windows Server 2003, and all others are Windows 2000
>> >> > >> > Server
>> >> > >> > (all
>> >> > >> > standard).
>> >> > >> > The FSMO role holder / PDC emulator is one of the Windows >> >> > >> > 2000
>> >> > >> > Server
>> >> > >> > systems.
>> >> > >> > All DCs run SQL Server 2000 SP4 to serve production
>> >> > >> > applications
>> >> > >> > running
>> >> > >> > on
>> >> > >> > workstations.
>> >> > >> > All DCs do DNS.
>> >> > >> > All DCs are partners in DFS.
>> >> > >> > No Exchange Servers exist on the domain.
>> >> > >> > SFU running on 2 DCs.
>> >> > >> > FTP running on 2 DCs.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > There is no lab. Yes, we apply all patches / updates / >> >> > >> > changes
>> >> > >> > to
>> >> > >> > a
>> >> > >> > live
>> >> > >> > production environment which must remain up and running >> >> > >> > 24/7.
>> >> > >> > If
>> >> > >> > the
>> >> > >> > servers
>> >> > >> > stop running the company's production equipment stops >> >> > >> > running.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > When I applied the 2003 AD schema upgrades so that I could >> >> > >> > add
>> >> > >> > the
>> >> > >> > 2003
>> >> > >> > DC
>> >> > >> > we saw an immediate and much-needed improvement in >> >> > >> > replication
>> >> > >> > behavior.
>> >> > >> > That
>> >> > >> > was done following a very long period during which I had to
>> >> > >> > clean
>> >> > >> > up AD
>> >> > >> > from
>> >> > >> > what had gone before I inherited the domain -- all sorts of
>> >> > >> > ridiculous
>> >> > >> > workaround for allowing users from other domains to use
>> >> > >> > resources
>> >> > >> > on
>> >> > >> > this
>> >> > >> > domain, improper removal of a DC, etc. The domain is, at >> >> > >> > long
>> >> > >> > last,
>> >> > >> > running
>> >> > >> > error-free. DCDIAG, NETDIAG, REPLMON testing is all perfect.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > I am supposed to take these systems to Windows Server 2003 >> >> > >> > R2
>> >> > >> > and
>> >> > >> > add a
>> >> > >> > sixth DC., with 3 more to come early next year. I understand
>> >> > >> > that
>> >> > >> > I
>> >> > >> > should
>> >> > >> > apply another schema upgrade before adding any R2 systems. I
>> >> > >> > will
>> >> > >> > be
>> >> > >> > demoting
>> >> > >> > each DC in turn, removing it from the domain, doing a clean
>> >> > >> > installation
>> >> > >> > of
>> >> > >> > R2 SP2 (integrated), and then joining and promoting them >> >> > >> > again.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Yeah, I know it's crazy. Trust me when I tell you I have no
>> >> > >> > choice
>> >> > >> > but
>> >> > >> > to
>> >> > >> > operate the domain this way due to concerns about >> >> > >> > redundancy,
>> >> > >> > failure
>> >> > >> > of
>> >> > >> > inter-site communications, etc.
>> >> > >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>>



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: ad and dns setup
    ... "Jorge Silva" wrote: ... domain It gave me 2 errors, no dns servers have dns records for this dc ... error no logon servers.. ... Make sure that the _msdcs zone exists and the scope is set ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: ad and dns setup
    ... MCSE, MVP Directory Services ... "Jorge Silva" wrote: ... _msdcs, forward zone, reverse lookup zone. ... changes immediately to all servers, this helps to speedup the process. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: ad and dns setup
    ... Dcs per domain for a total of 6 Dcs ... "Jorge Silva" wrote: ... ones..and one more thing if i need to do this on all the servers it it ... - Make sure that the DC1 points to itself on Preferred DNS NIC ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Creating a new AD
    ... "Jorge Silva" wrote: ... I have pulled this setup from a different network and want to configure ... I tried to change the ip setup on all these servers and restarted dns ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Rename AD domain or move to new domain?
    ... Yes, you could use a VM to reproduce your environment, of course you should ... That's about the only way I can think of that would mimic our production ... I don't have the hardware to recreate physical servers. ... "Jorge Silva" wrote: ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)