Re: Expectations in UPgrade from NT4 to Win2K/2003 Srv

Jeff Middleton [SBS-MVP] typed this:


Jeff,
Thank you for the input.

I am not any longer worried about DDNS and the records being on D drive.
NT coming over (as I recall) can be expanded to 8GBs (right?) and so
after I get my first good boot (and will keep a copy of the boot.ini to
be checked - many thanks, seem to recall Powerquest stuff doing that
on several workstations clones I did once - nice to have the 'old' drives still onboard) I'll enlarge the copied over to '4GB' partition
to 8GB (indeed, if I think about it, believe I can do that out of the gate - I'm forgetting all the old 2GB on install to 4GB after and if the
BIOS supports it 8GB "NT" install stuff) -

Figured I'd have to re-do a lot of the print stuff... currently have
four Win2K servers and might just make one of them the 'print server' for a bit - I will be engaging IP direct printing after the upgrade is
complete... nicer overall and faster for what we do...

Understand what you say about the 'naming' of DNS - I guess that I should've said, "we have an external domain named www.whydoyouask.org
and our CURRENT NT internal domain is called RTBNET - I want to make
the internal DNS name RTBNET.org or .com or whatever... see what I mean. I was just wondering if there were any drawbacks between Win2K's
management of the 'domain naming' and the old (we'll have two NT machines still active - mixed mode here - for another two months) NT
manners?

Thanks again.

Doc 
Doc,

I followed everything you posted until I got to the very last line, and it
may not be important regardless.


These are two NetFrame 3100s with dual 400s and 1 GB ram (nice in their
day but "should" be okay for DDNS and a DC - will point the records to
a large D drive "if" this all works)



I'm interpreting that to read you are moving Dynamic DNS database to the D
drive. Are you really concerned about performance or space for this being an
issue?

To answer your question, what you propose to do will not have an impact upon
the scripts.

Print server operations may or may not work without effort, but basically
this isn't predictable because the drivers all have to be changed out in the
process. I would expect you get to keep your settings, but no promises.

The cloning should have no impact on the process provided you don't
introduce the annoying habit of Powerquest to redefine an entry in the
boot.ini causing a boot error on the next boot. You will need to ensure that
your boot.ini matches the configuration of the hardware, but beyond that,
should be fine.

Regarding the DNS Domain, you normally wouldn't prefer to name this exactly
as your public domain is named simply because it can be confusing and
doesn't actually simplify anything about your configuration. Normally, if
you are running DNS to only support your internal AD activity and to provide
forwarding support for web browsing, you don't care what the internal domain
is named. Something like domain.local is preferred in the SBS world, or
domain.lan, or even domain.corp. Naming your internal domain which is
private space the same as your public domain is great until you have a
reason to not want them to match, and then you are stuck with a full
reinstall of the domain to solve that AD problem....or a painful Rendom
process.




--
Rich "Doc" Colley

mailto: pc-dc-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Expectations in UPgrade from NT4 to Win2K/2003 Srv
    ... At the point that you upgrade from NT to AD, ... > Understand what you say about the 'naming' of DNS - I guess that I ... > and our CURRENT NT internal domain is called RTBNET - I want to make ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.migration)
  • Re: Domain Controllers
    ... The configuration shows an alternate DNS address of 4.2.2.2. ... The computers that have the problem are the ones that do ... > Although...you should point to another DNS server for redundancy. ... >> Computers on the network are having issues keeping drives mapped. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Sunfire V215 and V245, the good, the bad and the ugly.
    ... We're thinking about replacing our DNS servers and consolidating some ... power supplies and multiple CPU capability. ... I am concerned about the 'hot pluggable' drives. ...
    (SunManagers)
  • Re: Best Practice AD Domain Suffix .local or .com
    ... i'm not a fully certified network manager but my solution was: ... under dns for outside domain, ... Is this now the recomended internal domain when building a AD domain? ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Fedora Core 3 test 2 performance
    ... > So, I'm getting sufficient performance from the drives now, but ... than 256MB of DRAM may find the list a bit long. ... build lists of files that can be used with /usr/sbin/readahead to keep ... Also the BIGGEST slow down for most people is DNS. ...
    (Fedora)