Re: New Server, installing Transition Pack

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

From: Jeff L (***jeff_at_availabletech.net)
Date: 09/29/04 

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 22:50:48 -0400

Mike,

Who told you that you need a transition pack and why? It might be that you
do not need to do this.

Four questions for determining if you need transition pack:

1) Do you have more than 75 users?
2) Do you need to break each of you servers into individual boxes (Exchange,
SQL, ISA)?
3) Do you need to run more than 2 physical processors on your server?
4) Is performance an issue?

If the answer to all four of these questions is NO, you do NOT need to
transition.

Regards,

Jeff Loucks
       Available Technology ®
            Solutions For Professionals ®
                  www.availabletechnology.com

"Mike D" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:32a101c4a5b2$2317f1b0$a501280a@phx.gbl...
> Hello, My network currently consists of an SBS 2003
> Server with Exchange setup and ISA, IIS, backups etc etc
> (more supposed to be a file server) and a Windows 2003
> Server Machine that is our application server running SQL
> and Symantec Anti Virus.
>
> We've just bought two new top of the range servers to
> replace the old ones and we're moving to a full Windows
> 2003 domain. Unfortunately as the only way to upgrade is
> Via Transition Pack (according to Microsoft) I'm going to
> need to install SBS2003 onto one of the new servers,
> configure it then run the transition pack to upgrade it.
> I can then install the second server with Windows 2003
> and install SQL etc.
>
> I have a couple of Questions: -
>
> 1. Are there any problems with me doing things the way
> I'm going to, I've never had to use this Transition pack,
> would rather just have installed Windows 2003 on both and
> installed Exchange etc etc
>
> 2. Should I just have one DC (the one I upgrade from SBS
> to 2003) or is it best practice to make the second server
> a DC also to share the load? I know it's common to have a
> standalone server as the application server but this
> leaves only one DC in the domain.
>
> 3. If I do make them both DC's what roles are best where,
> can I move roles from server to server after this type of
> upgrade?
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.
>
> M
>

Relevant Pages

  • Defect in installer for Antivirus Corp Ed 9.0.1.1000 when upgrading from 9.0.0.x
    ... antivirus solution and have Windows XP desktops you'd like to upgrade to XP ... SP2 and wish to have the most recent build of SAV 9 that is XP SP2 compatible. ... to install to servers & PCs to provide XP SP 2 compatibility. ... Once you upgrade your Primary Server to 9.0.1.1000 and attempt to ...
    (NT-Bugtraq)
  • Re: 2008 or 2003
    ... To install a 2008 DC in a 2003 domain the schema has to be upgraded to version 44. ... The schema is the same in your complete domain, the schema upgrade will add additional AD objects which are needed for 2008. ... 2008 ad schema instead of setting it up as a 2003 AD server I need all ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.setup)
  • RE: DNS Question on NT4 to AD upgrade
    ... With the dell you can install NT4.0 it is just is not supported by dell. ... Then perform your upgrade on the NT 4.0 Machine although this ... pointing to the new WINS server on the first dhcp scope. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory)
  • Re: Exchange SP1 stopped all smtp traffic
    ... Cannot upgrade virtual server http://stargate:80. ... al server to a new virtual server extended with Windows SharePoint Services. ... Installation fails and mail flow stops when you install Exchange Server 2003 ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: SBS2003/NT4 migration - Trust issue?
    ... Introduced SBS into the existing AD. ... I am having a problem with an SBS 2003 upgrade. ... Install temporary NT4 server on spare hardware, ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)