Re: SBS2003 redundancy
- From: "CO-DBA-SC-EL" <dx6490@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 23:54:09 -0700
"Cris Hanna [SBS-MVP]" <crisnospamhanna@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in message news:Oklw%23O4eFHA.4040@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Well you've mis-interpreted the documentation slightly
> The fact is: you may have as many domain controllers as you wish
> within the SBS domain up to the 75 connection license limit, however
> the SBS server must hold the FSMO roles and be at the root of the
> AD Forest/ Domain. Therefore you cannot have two SBS servers in the same
> domain.
An therefore you cannot have true redundancy. You are at the mercy of
restoring from your last backup. This is the last thing that still prevents
me from moving my real world users and their computers to the SBS server. If
the server goes down the business is dead in the water until the server can
be restored, because without the domain controller the client computers are
seriously crippled.
C_O
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: SBS2003 redundancy
- From: Fisheye
- Re: SBS2003 redundancy
- References:
- SBS2003 redundancy
- From: WKellogg
- Re: SBS2003 redundancy
- From: Cris Hanna [SBS-MVP]
- SBS2003 redundancy
- Prev by Date: RE: locked computer
- Next by Date: Re: Upgrading from SBS 2000 to SBS 2003
- Previous by thread: Re: SBS2003 redundancy
- Next by thread: Re: SBS2003 redundancy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|