Re: Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- From: "newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxx" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 28 Aug 2006 06:14:43 -0700
We actually do manage the log files and unfortunately this is not what
is creating our problems, I wish it could be that easy.
SuperGumby [SBS MVP] wrote:
I'll bet there's no 'Exchange aware' backup happening and there's a
bucketload of space being consumed by old Exchange logfiles.
TELL ME I'M WRONG!!!!
and don't delete them. Run an exchange aware backup (NTBackup will do) and
reclaim the logfile space.
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1156768240.729290.161130@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is the history of the situation. I was not involved in the
original setup of the server, so I get to resolve a whole bunch of bad
decisions. The current server is an IBM with Dual Xeon 2.0 Processors,
3GB RAM and 72GB drive space. The drives are full; everybody refuses
to clean mailboxes because all of the emails for the past 10 years are
"VERY IMPORTANT". The exchange server is taking a very heavy load for
the size of the company. There is a great deal of shared data as well
at this point that is constantly being accessed. The company also is
growing very fast with possibly 25 new users within the next year.
Ideally what I would like to do is install the new server with File and
Print Sharing and yank the old server to reload over a long weekend. I
didn't have plans to use both as domain controller because I was under
the impression that a BDC can not exist in a Small Business Domain, It
would be great if it could work though. Is it possible to have both
2000SBS and 2003 Standard Ed server as domain controllers in the same
domain?
Steve Foster [SBS MVP] wrote:
newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I have a situation where we have outgrown a Windows 2000 SBS Server. We
have about 50 clients, 9 VPN connections, print & file sharing and spam
filtering on top of all of the other SBS functions & we are running out
of drive space fast. We have added new drives already and at this
point it is not an option to add more drives. What I would like to do
is add a new Windows 2003 Standard Edition Server as the PDC to do AD,
DHCP, DNS, VPNs Print and File sharing and then keep the 2000 SBS
server to just handle exchange and spam filtering and disable all other
features. I do understand that the 2000 server cannot run as a BDC and
will not share the AD. What sort of problems am I going to run into by
doing this?
SBS must remain a DC and hold all the FSMO roles, so you can't move AD
off
it. You can have additional DCs if you really want to, but they serve
little purpose beyond giving you additional disaster survival options.
As for the rest, DHCP and DNS are trivial in terms of load, VPN belongs
with ISA which must remain on the SBS, which only really leaves
File&Print
services, another relatively trivial load.
Really, I don't see a major advantage to buying additional server grade
hardware just to run F&P in an SBS domain, unless you're making very
heavy
use of both SQL and Exchange.
What spec is the current server?
--
Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
---------------------------------------
MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- From: SuperGumby [SBS MVP]
- Re: Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- References:
- Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- From: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- From: Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
- Re: Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- From: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- From: SuperGumby [SBS MVP]
- Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- Prev by Date: Re: SBS 2003 OWA only working on lan, no public connection
- Next by Date: Re: Server a disaster .. need to manually save mailboxes
- Previous by thread: Re: Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- Next by thread: Re: Using 2000 SBS on a 2003 Standard Domain
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|