Re: DNS replication when installing new DC in domain

> Respectfully, I disagree completely about installing NT4 on

It is always respectful to disagree when you use facts and explain
your reasoning logically....

This is a technical list and if we don't correct each other and
explain our thinking it would greatly interere with learning
and growing our skills.

> Reasons:
> 1. Trying to install NT4 on an IBM 236 server with Raid 5 400 gig array,
> and a Broadcom ethernet NIC is impossible, as there are no drivers for NT4
> for raid or NIC. Ditto for new Dell rack mount 2x00 series. It can't be
> done, as there are no drivers

And not necessary. You can install NT on junk
hardware (this becomes a temp server in a sense
too, but it's not something you really even need
to do most of the time) if you wish.

My real objection to the "temp" server is not so much
the word "temp" but more importantly the phrase
"promote offline to PDC" that is from this line of your original
message:

> I am planning on a *temp* NT4 server to promote offline to PDC in
> a private network, then upgrade to Win2k3 SP1 on that temp machine.

You really should use the ACTUAL PDC whether it is
a New PDC (temporarily running NT4) or the former
'real' PDC.

Any changes that occur between the promotion and the
new domain switch over will be LOST of you do an
offline promotion. If you wish to have a backout strategy
then put a BDC offline (aka "BDC in the closet method)
but good backups are really as good or even better.

Most of the time, you just want to upgrade the
actual PDC and be done with it.

There was some way that the poster (was that you?)
going to use the "temp" server in an odd manner,
when either upgrading the current PDC or putting
in an newer NT4 BDC->PDC then upgrading it is the
easy way.

You do the latter only if you have an NT4 PDC
that CANNOT upgrade. Usually you can then keep
the upgraded NT4->PDC (especially if it's new)
or retire it in favor of new hardware if you
prefer -- either right after install or later.

> 2. Just installing Server 2003 with R2 is going to use 3-5 gigs for
> install and swap file.

Swap file can be small for a while, and moved
later. If performance is an issue you likely
want it separated from the systemroot (eventually)
anyway. It will fit in under 2 Gig actually.


> Installing subsequent apps like SQL, etc
> will use lots of disk, and allowing for a 20-30 gig RAID C volume is
> only good sense. I've wrestled with enough boxes that were set up
> too small. Moving program files, and the like to other volumes
> can easily break other apps, or cause issues down the road
> with restores, disaster recovery, etc.

No, there is a standard trick for moving program
files that breaks nothing (that I have every found,
and there is zero reason anything should or could
every notice.) Use a Reparse/Junction point.

I move Program files almost routinely but you don't
need this to stay small initially.

Remember, if you don't want this server you can
turn it into a non-DC later.

>
> 3. This server will have 3 gigs of ram, which NT4 doesn't handle
> well

Not an issue. You can use the RAM after it is
running Windows Server.

> >>> I am not. Clean installs are vastly overrated -- these OSes were
> > DESIGNED to be upgraded.
> >
>
> Respectfully, I again disagree. A pristine install of a production server
> that will last 4-6 years is most desirable, imho.

It's just superstition. Take care of your
machines and they upgrade just fine.

After you are on Windows Server you can use
ASR to upgrade in the future.

> Many of my peers concur on this point, as well as many of the MVP's on
> this site.

Yes, many do. But the real experts can take care
of their machines just fine.



--
Herb Martin, MCT, MCSD, MCSE, MVP
HerbM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://LearnQuick.Com
512 388 7339 -or- 1 800 MCSE PRO
Accelerated MCSE in a Week Seminars




.

Relevant Pages

  • Should I install win2k?
    ... I was happily co-existing with NT4 Sp6a Workstation for about the last ... to install) Win2K from that. ... won't run under XP (they run fine under NT and Win2K). ... Win2K upgrade but that's a huge amount of work and I'm now dealing ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.setup)
  • Re: NT4 Single Domain to 2K3 Active Directory
    ... I just did the steps you outlined for upgrading the NT4 to win 2003 .. ... > still a PDC emulator which acts like a PDC for NT4 clients and does some ... these will be the servers your clients point to for DNS. ... >> We're planning an upgrade for a client with a single domain. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.migration)
  • Re: Active dir upgrade w/ old PDC
    ... user manager for domains WILL always target the PDC FSMO. ... In NT4 changes can ... that we have to use Active Directory users and groups in the new domain ... as you upgrade a nt4 domain, the PDC is upgraded from nt4 to w2k3. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Install of a win2003 in a NT4 domain
    ... When you are upgrading an NT4 domain to Windows Server 2003 Active ... the first machine to be upgraded must be the PDC on the domain. ... upgraded if the existing hardware won't support the upgrade. ... You can do a clean NT4 install of a "swing" machine as an additional BDC on ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.general)
  • Re: Upgrade NT4.0 to 2003
    ... upgrade is to upgrade the NT4 PDC. ... Install Windows Server 2003 on the new box. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.setup)