That requires forest functional level 1 which would prevent the presence of any 2000 DCs in any domain within the forest (NT4 Ds are permissible) ... if the lack of Windows 2000 is feasible, the new ISTG (in both my own and Microsoft's internal tests) would easily fulfill your requirements.
-- Dean Wells MSEtechnology * Tel: +1 (954) 501-4307 * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://msetechnology.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Salandra, Justin A. Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 2:43 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Manual Replication - Any suggestions? What about upgrading your servers to Windows Server 2003, the ISTG in W2K3 can handle up to 3,000 sites tested, 5,000 in theory. -----Original Message----- From: Jef Kazimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
