Re: [ActiveDir] Seeking some feedback ... use of 2003 Admin. tools against a non-forest prep'd 2000 only directory ...

[Glenn Corbett]

Dean,   I'm not quite sure I understand the question (it may have something to do with it being 1am here)   Running the 2k3 Admin tools on 2000 / XP machines wont require any mods to the forest schema (and in fact is the only way you can perform some administrative tasks from XP machines (like e2k) - grrrrr Microsoft).   That being said, it sounds like you are performing a selective update of the schema with those properties / objects to give some additional 2003 'ish features without going all they way and really 2k3'ing the environment ? Are they simply additional properties to existing objects (like users, groups, computers), or it it something more fundamental ?   Sounds like a feasible alternative, provided that you arent changing underlying properties within objects that may affect downlevel 2000 clients or DC's (which it sounds like you arent).  Personally, I dont think MS would support you in the slightest if you did have issues in the 2k environment, and would be tricky to undo as you cant reverse schema mods in 2k. The only option would be a 'forced' rollup to 2k3 before the client environment is ready for it.   What sort of additional functionality are you gaining, and is this enough to potentially have an "unsupported" AD in the eyes of MS ? (I'm not saying for certain they wouldnt support you, but from personal experience its probable).   My suggestion would be to get a definate yes or no from MS on the supportability of this change, and if they are happy make your decision then.  The schema isnt written in stone obviously, so is meant to be changed (within reason), your just modding it in a slightly *strange* way.   I would certainly be interested in the details of what changes you are making, and what additional functionality you are getting.  My understanding with things like Multiple Object Edit is that it is simply additional functionality within the 2k3 Admin tools, and had nothing really to do with AD.   As to schema mods, I've certainly made several changes to each schema for directories I've designed to incorporate additional properties for objects, but havent tried anything like your doing.   Glenn   ----- Original Message ----- From: Dean Wells To: AD mailing list (send) Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 10:19 PM Subject: [ActiveDir] Seeking some feedback ... use of 2003 Admin. tools against a non-forest prep'd 2000 only directory ... I'm seeking some feedback regarding the use of the new 2003 admin. tools against a Windows 2000 only directory. I implemented these tools many moons ago on an internal, production 2000 forest on both XP and Server 2003 clients and have experienced no significant (insurmountable) issues. Coincidentally enough, I recently offered this as an alternative *potential* solution in the public newsgroups for those administering 2000 directories who wish to take advantage of the newer features such as "Saved queries" and "Multiple object edit" (to name but a few) ... quite honestly, that's the main reason for soliciting your feedback.   I'm considering automating the necessary directory modifications such that those customers (specifically, one of mine) wishing to use the new features provided by the uplevel ADMINPAK are able to do so without going through the convoluted steps necessary to enable certain components and gaining these features without fully forest prepping their existing directory (NOTE - doing so is, IMHO, a satisfactory approach but I'm certain that the myth of "Extending a Windows 2000 schema is a bad, bad thing" is likely to raise its head ... thus the reasoning behind making ONLY the necessary directory modifications).   What I'm looking for are opinions/technical commentary or actual experience of doing so in production or test environments other than my own.   I've exhaustively tested this including proceeding with a full Windows 2003 forest prep in order to ensure that the modifications made to the base 2000 schema were NOT prohibitive to a future 2003 upgrade ... they weren't (this did require some minor modifications prior to executing the forest prep though).   Thanks in advance for your thoughts and/or experiences.   Dean   -- Dean Wells MSEtechnology * Email: dwells@msetechnology.com http://msetechnology.com