I'm also having some trouble with understanding what the resource contention issue is that would cause me to undertake a project to P2V DCs.
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Jonathan Link <jonathan.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, you'll have X amount of time where your entire network is down. I > can't generally afford sustained downtime like that, even planned. > > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Neil Standley <standl...@net-venture.com> > wrote: > >> While I have yet to P2V a DC, I have converted several other member >> servers and they were all relatively quick, roughly 90 minutes or so to >> perform the conversion. Then once the new VM comes up configure the IP if >> necessary and reboot, activate license, check event logs/services and done, >> at least up to this point. >> >> >> >> How would this differ with a DC? >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto: >> listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jonathan Link >> >> *Sent:* Thursday, June 05, 2014 5:40 PM >> *To:* ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com >> *Subject:* Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC >> >> >> >> A P2V, especially an offline one, requires some amount of downtime. It's >> been a while since I've done a P2V, but I don't remember them being all >> that quick... >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Sean Martin <seanmarti...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> I'm pretty sure the OP gets the point, converting to virtual is not the >> ideal path forward. I think everyone here can appreciate that we don't >> always have the luxury of choosing the right path. >> >> >> >> I don't have any direct experience, but it looks like the articles cover >> the process fairly well. >> >> >> >> I'm actually having to consider the same effort for Windows 2003 DCs >> running DNS, WINs and DHCP. We have a hardware refresh effort that needs to >> be completed ASAP and I'm running up against time constraints that may not >> allow me to migrate all of the services and ensure all clients and servers >> have been updated accordingly. A P2V would give us some breathing room and >> allow the migration to be thoroughly thought through, planned and executed. >> >> >> >> Please respond with your experience should you decide to move forward >> with your P2V. >> >> >> >> - Sean >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Jon Harris <jk.har...@live.com> wrote: >> >> Personally I have never been comfortable with allowing users access to a >> DC for any reason other than the purpose the DC is for. Allowing a DC as a >> file server is just asking for trouble and on a 2003 having print server is >> just asking for multiple restarts if there are printing issues. Both >> belong on another machine. >> >> Jon >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> From: jnat...@hotmail.com >> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com >> >> Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC >> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 19:00:50 -0400 >> >> >> >> +1 >> new DC, DCPROMO, old DC demote, and export / import print servers >> (assuming there are dozens or hundreds) otherwise recreate >> >> >> Jean-Paul Natola >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> From: standl...@net-venture.com >> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com >> Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC >> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 22:14:56 +0000 >> >> One of the DCs is file/print/DNS, the other is a DC/DNS server, it also >> had Exchange 2003 but that was migrated off to a new 2010 server a while >> back. >> >> >> >> I see the reason for what you’re suggesting and the only arguments I can >> come up with is that P2V would save me from having to reconfigure client >> device IP settings, and building the new DC. >> >> I guess it boils down to whether or not I’m willing to take the risk of >> something going wrong with the conversion. >> >> >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> >> *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto: >> listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Webster >> *Sent:* Thursday, June 05, 2014 2:50 PM >> *To:* ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com >> *Subject:* [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC >> >> >> >> Why? Is this server a DC only and runs nothing but DC type functions? >> If so, bring up a new VM and DCPromo it. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> >> >> >> >> Webster >> >> >> >> *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [ >> mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] *On >> Behalf Of *Neil Standley >> >> *Sent:* Thursday, June 05, 2014 4:40 PM >> *To:* ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com >> *Subject:* [NTSysADM] P2V DC >> >> >> >> I’ve been reading up regarding P2V of Domain controllers (2003 R2 SP2 in >> this case) and I think I have it down but wanted to get some feedback from >> the collective before setting forth on my project. >> >> >> >> Following the recommendations from the articles below, my understanding >> is that I should: >> >> >> >> a. Perform an Offline conversion. Both DCs would be powered off at >> the completion of the conversion process. >> >> b. Disable time sync between the virtual DC and the virtual host. >> In this case I’m using VMware Essentials 5.5 U1 – Note this is already done. >> >> c. Never connect the original, physical DC to my network again to >> avoid USN rollback. >> >> >> >> >> http://blogs.technet.com/b/askds/archive/2010/06/10/how-to-virtualize-active-directory-domain-controllers-part-21.aspx >> >> >> http://blogs.technet.com/b/askds/archive/2010/06/10/how-to-virtualize-active-directory-domain-controllers-part-2.aspx >> >> >> http://www.sole.dk/virtualizing-your-domain-controllers-without-getting-fired/ >> >> >> >> Is it really this simple? I feel like there’s a gotcha out there waiting >> to bite me real hard. >> >> Any suggestions or pointers to additional reading is much appreciated. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >
