|
Looking forward to it.....much!
-rtk
If
everything falls into place you can judge that for yourself in
April..
--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad -
MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
Yeah, that's what I hear.....
;o)
Rick Kingslan MCSE, MCSA, MCT
Microsoft MVP - Active
Directory
Associate Expert
Expert Zone -
www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
WebLog -
www.msmvps.com/willhack4food
Hey! You're gonna get me in trouble, and
Roger's a little bigger than I am!
Missy
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 4:13
PM
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OUs by server
function?
And, Mr. Seielstad, who do you think I was speaking
of? ;o) Missy and I submitted your name. It was a
coordinated effort to corrupt you further.....
-rtk
Um, yeah. Like me for instance. I've rarely posted to the Microsoft
news groups, but I've been here for quite a while and some other public
email lists for 6-7 years.
Roger
--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D.
Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis
Inc.
Michael,
Not necessarily where there is a Microsoft
presence. There are some folks on this list who have been nominated
and are now MVPs because of involvement here - not necessarily on the
Public NGs. Participationon th public NGs is but one way.
Community, and contributing to it is a many faceted thing. Remember,
this is peer recognition of excellence and professionalism - and not
necessarily by a Microsoft peer.
Rick Kingslan MCSE, MCSA, MCT
Microsoft MVP -
Active Directory
Associate Expert
Expert Zone -
www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
Interesting. So people that are active on mailing
lists where MS isn't present don't stand a chance?
I need to resign from all these mailing lists and
spend the time on newsgroups! :-)
Michael
Any tricks involving wine are welcomed, but
Microsoft does have other criteria too:
Tony
What does one have to do to
become an MVP? Does it involve parting bodies of water or turning them
into wine?
:-)
Michael Parent MCSE
MCT
Analyst I - Web Services
ITOS - Systems Enablement
Maritime
Life Assurance Company
(902) 453-7300 x3456
|
| Rich Milburn
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/31/2003 12:16 PM
Please respond to ActiveDir
|
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:
RE: [ActiveDir] OUs by server
function? |
You're right, I was referring to WMI filtering.
Thanks for the welcome, I've
never seen so many MVPs in one place!! J
I looked on
winnetmag.com and didn't find it, I'll have a look for the hardcopy I read
it in at home...
Rich
From: Tony Murray
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003
9:01 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE:
[ActiveDir] OUs by server function?
Rich
Welcome to the
list!
If you have a link to the article,
please post it. I'm sure others would be interested.
Scope filtering using security groups is not new to
2003. You might be thinking of WMI filtering, which is new with
XP/2003.
The problem with scope filtering is
(as you rightly point out) the reporting side of things. I'm not
sure whether the GPMC includes anything for this or not, but if it does I
haven't used it. The new scripting functions probably offer the
ability to display the appropriate reports. My friend Matty Holland
is something of a Group Policy guru and might be able to offer insight
into this. Matty?
Tony
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich
Milburn
Sent: Freitag, 31. Oktober 2003 14:31
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OUs by
server function?
I think
Windows Mag (or .Net mag or I forget what it's called now!) had an article
about using filters - they're new with 2003 right? What's a good way
to keep straight which GPOs are being applied to which servers though?
Vbscript-generated web reports? Manual documentation?
OUs make it fairly obvious to tell... but I like your solution,
takes care of things dynamically (since OUs aren't dynamic).
Rich
PS I'm new to this list, wow I've been missing a
lot!!
From: Tony Murray
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003
4:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE:
[ActiveDir] OUs by server function?
Why not try this approach:
Start of with a single OU for all your different server
types. Use security group filtering to (exceptionally) handle group
policies that need to be applied to certain types of servers but not
others (remember that computers can be members of security groups).
If you find you have to do a lot of filtering and this becomes too
difficult to manage then create new OUs as required.
Here is some on-line info about scope filtering:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url="">
The benefit of this approach is that you start of with a
simple design and then grow it organically as required, rather than
beginning with (potentially) an over-complicated OU structure.
Tony
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Donnerstag, 30. Oktober
2003 20:37
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
RE: [ActiveDir] OUs by server function?
Heh, yeah I understand those are the 2 primary criteria for
creating OUs. Let me try again :-)
Here's the thing, I am not
sure delegation of computer objects buys you much for servers, so that
leaves us with GPO.
On the surface there seems
to be a case to dividing them up for this purpose, but I have to wonder if
the reality bears that out or not.
So perhaps my question,
more focused, ought to have been: for those who have done this, in reality
is it practical to try to deploy GPO based on a server's role?
One
problem we have is that some servers share roles, and since a server
cannot be in two OUs a tthe same time...
I was
wondering if there other similar "gotchas", and conversely if anyone has
enjoyed some successes in going this route...
Michael Parent MCSE MCT
Analyst I - Web Services
ITOS -
Systems Enablement
Maritime Life Assurance Company
(902) 453-7300
x3456
|
| "Tony Murray"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/30/2003 03:11 PM
Please respond to ActiveDir
|
To:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject:
RE: [ActiveDir] OUs by server
function? |
Some good
questions to ask when thinking about creating an OU structure
are:
1. Will the delegation of
administration be different for the various computers?
2. Will the application of group policy be different for
the various computers?
If the answer to
either of these is yes, then you should consider creating separate OUs.
If not, lump them all under the same OU.
In my company, we have separate OUs for client
machines and servers, because they are administered by different teams.
Administration is delegated at this OU level and is inherited by the
OUs at the level below. Beneath these OUs we have a level for
applying different group policies, e.g. under the Clients OU we have
something like, W2K, Lab, Legacy, etc.
Tony
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Donnerstag, 30. Oktober
2003 16:34
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
[ActiveDir] OUs by server function?
I am currently
erdesigning our OU structure and was wondering:
Has
anyone done an OU structure that accounts for server function i.e. file
and print, web, database?
Was it useful? What other computer
structures have you use successfully?
Michael Parent MCSE
MCT
Analyst I - Web Services
ITOS - Systems Enablement
Maritime
Life Assurance Company
(902) 453-7300 x3456
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE------- PRIVILEGED / CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be
contained in this message or any attachments. This information is strictly
confidential and may be subject to attorney-client privilege. This message
is intended only for the use of the named addressee. If you are not the
intended recipient of this message, unauthorized forwarding, printing,
copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you should kindly
notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal
criminal law. Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor
and review the content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail
address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the
Applebee's International, Inc. e-mail system.
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE------- PRIVILEGED / CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be
contained in this message or any attachments. This information is strictly
confidential and may be subject to attorney-client privilege. This message
is intended only for the use of the named addressee. If you are not the
intended recipient of this message, unauthorized forwarding, printing,
copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you should kindly
notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal
criminal law. Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor
and review the content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail
address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the
Applebee's International, Inc. e-mail system.
|
