Thanks for the advice everyone! Unfortunately I just started at this company, and it seems this deicision was made before I got here. I'm trying to get background research done as to why this direction was chosen.
I did come from a bigger environment where we made changes to the ISTG timing to avoid some of the issues which worked fine until we were able to consider 2003. Here, I'd rather push forward with the 2003 deployment instead of going manual. Jef No likey da Evil! Original Message: Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Thu Sep 04 17:25:29 2003 >Received: from mail.activedir.org [64.245.160.7] by mail16.crystaltech.com with SMTP; > Thu, 04 Sep 2003 17:25:29 -0700 >Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48] by mail.activedir.org >with ESMTP > (SMTPD32-7.07) id A3F3EDE010C; Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:00:03 -0400 >Received: from dialup-67.72.217.187.dial1.detroit1.level3.net ([67.72.217.187] >helo=mainpro) > by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) > id 19v357-0001zi-00 > for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 04 Sep 2003 16:00:02 -0700 >From: "Joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Manual Replication - Any suggestions? >Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 18:59:59 -0400 >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4024 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 >In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Importance: Normal >Precedence: bulk >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >Hmm that seems kind of small to turn off the KCC. I wouldn't do it >myself. In fact we have about 500 sites defined, 375 DC's spread across >them, and nine domains. Most of the sites have a DC from one of the five >main domains though. If you have a hub and spoke topology and the site >links are configured properly and you have site transitivity turned off >you shouldn't have an issue. > >Manually generating your topology is an evil evil thing. > >Also where did the MS advice come from? Not trying to smash MS but there >are only a few people from MS that I will listen to about AD right off. >Mostly I make the person I am talking to prove what they are saying. >Haven't found anyone in MCS yet with a really strong grasp, only decent. >One main person in PSS - JD. Then of course you have the folks like >Stuart Kwan and Dave Trulli. > > > joe > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jef Kazimer >Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 10:51 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: [ActiveDir] Manual Replication - Any suggestions? > > >I'm currently working at a company where we have 115 international >sites, and 3 domains. The KCC and ISTG are working sub-optimal, and it >seems on MS's advice we are going to calculate a manual replication >connection model. > >Anyone have any experience this, and have any gotcha's we should be >expecting? > >Thanks, > >Jef > > >List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm >List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm >List archive: >http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > >List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm >List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm >List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
