Re: secondary domain controller
From: Param R. (pr_at_nospam.com)
Date: 12/14/04
- Next message: Param R.: "Re: secondary domain controller"
- Previous message: Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]: "<< Security Bulletins released today >>>"
- In reply to: SuperGumby [SBS MVP]: "Re: secondary domain controller"
- Next in thread: SBS03 Rocks!!!: "Re: secondary domain controller"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:42:05 -0600
Regarding internet access how can you assume companies can go without it for
several hours? In today's day and age to make that assumption is WRONG.
There are companies out there who's sole source of income rely on internet
based operations.
thanks!
"SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <not@your.nellie> wrote in message
news:ewcoa1P4EHA.2804@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>I disagree with Susan. SBS _is_ 24*7.
>
> 99% of the time. C'mon guys, that gives me almost 1hr every 4 days, or one
> business hour every 10-12 business days. There's not a single SBS system
> out there which I have needed to reboot THAT OFTEN. For Pete's sake, the
> LoungeAN stays up for longer than that.
>
> Is a 2nd DC in an SBS domain worthwhile? The one circumstance where I can
> say yes immediately is 'remote branch'.
> Is it required? no.
> Is it desirable? It is more desirable under SBS2003 than previously.
>
> Does having a 2nd DC, or member server, address the issue of Exch or ISA
> availability? Not one skeric.
>
> Does paying a little bit extra for server class hardware, making that
> hardware as redundant as it can be, attaching it to a regulated power
> source (UPS), maintaining the update status of all components, provide an
> alternative? Yes.
>
> On the internet question. People have been doing business for many
> thousands of years without internet access, it really ain't that big a
> deal. It was not that long ago that getting mail took anything from a few
> days to most of a year, why do people worry about 15 minutes? Yes, I
> acknowledge we live in a fast paced world and there are business
> opportunities to be benefited from if information transfer happens as
> quickly as it can. However, if you rely on having internet connectivity
> one of two things will occur, you'll spend BUCKETS of cash on truly
> redundant connections or you'll find out your business actually can do
> without it for a few hours.
>
> "PR" <pr@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:u3uFXxM4EHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> In my environment, Exchange & ISA are the main elements. Without those
>> two
>> the clock starts ticking and the company starts losing $$.. We got 2
>> internet lines to minimize downtime due to ISP issues. But if ISA goes
>> down
>> then it doesnt matter. If I could find a way to backup/failover these 2
>> modules then I am good to go.
>>
>> thanks!
>>
>> "Javier Gomez [SBS MVP]" <javier_gomez@remove.this.engineer.com> wrote in
>> message news:uaHjB4L4EHA.2540@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>> It really depends on your scenario. Having a 2nd DC is only helpful to
>>> get
>>> people authenticated (and BTW you don't need to seize the FSMO roles
>> unless
>>> you plan to "retire" the SBS box permanently). If your business depends
>>> on
>>> the SBS a lot then adding a 2nd DC is not much use (i.e. email,
>>> internet,
>>> etc. would be down). On the other hand, I have a client that uses pretty
>>> much everything on the SBS box... but they can continue their operations
>> as
>>> long as they have a file server (in which case a 2nd DC might make
>>> sense).
>>>
>>> --
>>> Javier [SBS MVP]
>>> www.msmvps.com/javier
>>> << SBS ROCKS !!! >>
>>>
>>> "Param R." <pr@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%231qbKbL4EHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>> > True, I could be over-reacting. But then I have had so many problems
>> over
>>> > the past few weeks with servers going down and power failures (over &
>>> > beyond UPS time). Eventually it will be me that will have to come
>> running
>>> > at 1am if anything were to go down..
>>> >
>>> > thanks!
>>> >
>>> > "Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]"
>>> > <sbradcpa@pacbell.net>
>>> > wrote in message news:%23rabNYL4EHA.3908@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>> >> I've had my SBS go down like twice..maybe three times since 1999 when
>>> >> I
>>> >> first installed it.
>>> >>
>>> >> If the server isn't there, the XP machines use cached credentials to
>>> >> logon to the local profile.
>>> >>
>>> >> Personally I think you are spending a lot of energy on something that
>>> >> with spares and good equipment, doesn't happen.
>>> >>
>>> >> Param R. wrote:
>>> >>> So if main SBS were to go down, I have to make the secondary seize
>>> >>> all
>>> >>> the roles?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> "Javier Gomez [SBS MVP]" <javier_gomez@remove.this.engineer.com>
>>> >>> wrote
>>> >>> in message news:u4%23BoJL4EHA.2016@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>>Hi all, will SBS 2003 permit a secondary DC on the network?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>Yes.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>If yes, do I need to do any special configuration?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>Nope... just like any other Win2k3 domain. The only requirement is
>> that
>>> >>>>the SBS must hold all FSMO roles.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>--
>>> >>>>Javier [SBS MVP]
>>> >>>>www.msmvps.com/javier
>>> >>>><< SBS ROCKS !!! >>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> An open letter to the Security Community::
>>> >> http://msmvps.com/bradley/archive/2004/12/12/23540.aspx
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
- Next message: Param R.: "Re: secondary domain controller"
- Previous message: Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]: "<< Security Bulletins released today >>>"
- In reply to: SuperGumby [SBS MVP]: "Re: secondary domain controller"
- Next in thread: SBS03 Rocks!!!: "Re: secondary domain controller"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|