@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
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
.
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On
Behalf Of Richard Stovall
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 9:13 AM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
That's odd. I have done lots of conversions. A number of P2Vs, first to
VMware
@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
I suppose that was kind of my point. It’s odd. Despite my inherent ‘need to
know’ what causes this sort of thing, over the years I’ve come to realize that
some things just aren’t “knowable” and learned when to cut my losses and move
on. We too moved
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
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
.
*From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:
listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jon Harris
*Sent:* Thursday, June 05, 2014 4:13 PM
*To:* ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
*Subject:* RE: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
Personally I have never been comfortable with allowing users access
, 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
: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
You'd grill the patties over a flame before you microwave them?
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Neil Standley
standl...@net-venture.commailto:standl...@net-venture.com wrote:
I completely agree but having limited resources puts me at odds with having DCs
that are only DCs
Lol, I’d spit on it and walk away.
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On
Behalf Of Richard Stovall
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 8:38 AM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
You'd grill the patties over a flame before you
:* 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
] *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
@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
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.commailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com
...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:
listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jonathan Link
*Sent:* Friday, June 06, 2014 8:54 AM
*To:* ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
*Subject:* Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
I'm also having some trouble with understanding what the resource
contention issue
Subject: [spam] [dkim-failure] Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
You don't have time to do it twice, then. Is it possible to P2V a domain?
Yes, certainly, you've done a fair amount of research on the process. During
that process, I'm sure you've also seen indications that it isn't recommended.
Finally
/passing EOL.
I appreciate all of the feedback.
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On
Behalf Of Jonathan Link
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 9:19 AM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
You don't have time to do it twice
They only microwave the heel and the patty to reheat them (at least that's how
it was in the 80's lol)
Jean-Paul Natola
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 11:37:59 -0400
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
From: rich...@gmail.com
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
You'd grill the patties over a flame
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
You don't have time to do it twice, then. Is it possible to P2V a domain?
Yes, certainly, you've done a fair amount of research on the process. During
that process, I'm sure you've also seen indications that it isn't recommended.
Finally, you've come to peers
have to fix it
until you migrate all the parts to another machine, whether virtual or physical
does not matter, until later. YOU still have the same EOL.
Jon
From: standl...@net-venture.com
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] RE: P2V DC
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 18:00:32 +
+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 +
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
. 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
--
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
21 matches
Mail list logo
