PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Harvey Kamangwitz
*Sent:* Tuesday, December 05, 2006 11:41 PM
*To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
*Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] OT: Vista Activation and KMS
On 12/5/06, *Laura A. Robinson* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Inline...
--
*From:* [EMAIL
Oops. I forgot a few words: ...can coexist *using autodiscovery.*
**
-H
On 12/12/06, Harvey Kamangwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If a Vista KMS client contacts a beta KMS host, the client will receive
an invalid version error and will proceed to try another KMS from the list
provided by DNS
If you have any kind of a complex environment, you'll find volume activation
to be very frustrating indeed:
1. The KMS service can't support more than one key, so if you have Longhorn
VL clients in your environment you have to put up a second KMS
infrastructure for them.
2. You can't (rather,
On 12/5/06, Laura A. Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Inline...
--
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Harvey Kamangwitz
*Sent:* Tuesday, December 05, 2006 11:28 AM
*To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
*Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] OT
, but I would be completely floored if they did not have a way to revert behavior. I also would be totally surprised if your information security people were OK with this concept for the reasons I mentioned above.
TokenBloat is not the only concern you have here, Harvey.
On 10/20/06, Harvey
en assumed. What is the advantage here of adding forest C? I see that it's extra steps, but I don't see the connection to the drawn out go-at-your-own-pace migration.
I'm interested in having it spelled out for me though. Please. :)
On 10/10/06, Harvey Kamangwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
Hi all,
I'm interested in your opinion here, and perhaps a heads-up on requirements that may be coming your way.
We have a request from the sharepoint team to security-enable all of our 18,000 distribution lists. Our concern, naturally, is token size. What will this do to Joe User's access
I certainly wouldn't allow it if I were security either, but they said it was okay. Probably has something to do with the fact the acquisition will almost double the size of the company :).
The interim forest is a great idea. I had intended to bring up a test forest to dry-run the migration in
Hi all,
I'm consulting on a divestiture, and naturally the companies want their respective AD forests to have the minimum amount of contact necessary to migrate the security principals in the divestiture from company A to company B. I wanted to sanity check with this brain trust that we can do a
? If they're part of the same domain, what's the point?
Al
On 10/9/06, Harvey Kamangwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi all,
I'm consulting on a divestiture, and naturally the companies want their respective AD forests to have the minimum amount of contact necessary to migrate the security principals
it to work on D-Day. As I understand divestitures, they won't be very undrestanding if it's delayed due to an inability to set this up and pull off the migration. Lot's of raw nerves during the MAD process. :)
Al
On 10/9/06, Harvey Kamangwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, there are several
11 matches
Mail list logo
