Re: 130 domains in Windows 2003 forest.

Tech-Archive recommends: Speed Up your PC by fixing your registry

From: Herb Martin (news_at_LearnQuick.com)
Date: 08/02/04 

Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 12:19:21 -0500

"J.R." <janusz.romanowski@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:22506e4.0407310605.53535c0f@posting.google.com...
> We understand that we will be building a highly unusual environment
> for Windows 2003 but because of many security and political issues we
> might be forced to migrate and create 130 NT 4.0 individual domains
> into brand new Windows 2003 forest. Has anyone experienced any
> replication problems with that many domains under one forest? There
> will be one GC server in each site/domain.

GCs are a SITE job. If you sites are organized by domain
then it will accidentally work out to 1 per "domain" since
you should have at least one per site.

> Any idea on how large will
> the Global Catalog grow considering that there will be about 100 users
> in each of the 130 sites/domains? Thank you in advance for any help.

User accounts are something less than 4K, and GCs don't
replicate the majority of that data.

13,000 users is about (rough estimate) 50 Meg of disk space
even if you hold ALL of the properties so this isn't going to
stress a GC -- you will have to figure your replication traffic
based on expectation of changes, but even if 100 users accounts
were completely replicated each day, that is only about
400 KB. (100 x 4K )

With most WANS you could likely sustain this on an HOURLY
basis.

You really should push for conversion to OUs before implementing
as much of this as possible -- delegation is still possible and the
whole thing will be much easier and cheaper to manage.

If these domains "trust" each other enough to share resources (e.g.,
reside in the same forest) then they should be trustworth enough to
be OUs.

...then use Sites to control most of the replication. 

-- 
Herb Martin

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Site to Site communication
    ... >> using the interim domain functional level, you must specify user accounts ... >> implies that you would also need a forest transitive trust setup or you ... Your forests must be at Windows 2003 function level and have a transitive ... >>> cross forest site to site communication a Windows Server 2003 domains ...
    (microsoft.public.sms.setup)
  • Re: "Windows 2000 native" vs "Windows 2003 Server" functional leve
    ... Just like Neil said... ... Raise domain level for all domains in the forest ... I have read different articles about the replication enhancements of ... going to "Windows 2003 Server" level. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • RE: NTDS replication problems...
    ... Actually, this forest contain 3 domains, where two of them still have Windows ... Regarding the replication issue... ... Windows Server 2003. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • RE: "Windows 2000 native" vs "Windows 2003 Server" functional leve
    ... going to "Windows 2003 Server" level. ... Do you know if I can just upgrade the domain level (and wait with forest ... all domains to w2k3 domain func level and then the forest itself to w2k3 ... replication in Windows 2003, but is this only working if the domain ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Problem raising forest functional level to Windows 2003
    ... replmon and repladmin /showrepl shows successful replication between the ... All DC's are running Windows ... >>trying to raise the forest functional level from Windows 2000 to 2003. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)