Guido, i appreciate this is going into what seem to be the "murky depths" of AD but 
would you be able to expand on this concept of "version number" - it must relate 
somehow to replication which i thought to be based on USN's ?

GT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Grillenmeier, Guido" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:35:37 +0200
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] w2k authoritative restore

Re: small correction: it's not the USNs that are increased => it the version
Re: number 
Re: 
Re: and as far as I understand it, an object won't inherit an attribut until
Re: it's "used" the first time - so only attributes which are populated for
Re: an object will have a version number in the first place.  
Re: 
Re: maybe Brett can confirm this.
Re: 
Re: As such, a previously unused attribute can't be auth. restored (unless
Re: you eliminate all occurences in the domain/forest - which is equal to a
Re: domain/forest recovery)
Re: 
Re: /Guido
Re: 
Re: -----Original Message-----
Re: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 12:32 PM
Re: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] w2k authoritative restore
Re: 
Re: Guido, thanks for post reply 
Re: 
Re: full recovery of the domain is what i have fallen back to - 
Re: 
Re: was looking for a sanity check on this issue of authoritative (or not so
Re: as it seems ) restore 
Re: 
Re: is it a fair qu to ask though how the directory service resolves this
Re: issue of replication of attribute data that is blank (but which should
Re: have a higher USN by virtue of the authoritative restore) and that which
Re: has been populated but has a lower USN 
Re: 
Re: does it somehow use a system of a null USN for an attribute that has no
Re: data and which can be overwritten ??
Re: 
Re: GT
Re: 
Re: ----- Original Message -----
Re: From: "Grillenmeier, Guido" 
Re: Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:57:32 +0200
Re: To: 
Re: Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] w2k authoritative restore 
Re: 
Re: > sounds like you need a forest (or full domain) recovery if you screw 
Re: > up with the ADC... - how many DCs per domain do you have?
Re: > 
Re: > btw - the logic of "merging" data gets a new touch when you auth. 
Re: > restore groups in Win2003: once you're at 2003 forest-functional-level
Re: 
Re: > (LVR enabled) and you wish to restore group authoritatively, you'll 
Re: > also find members that were added to the group after the backup will 
Re: > re-populate into the auth-restored group, since with LVR the members 
Re: > are replicated separately as well... In this case, I usually preferr 
Re: > this "merge" feature, as this will guarantee you to get the group back
Re: 
Re: > to a most up to date state (unless a specific script, virus, stupid 
Re: > admin or whatever process accidentally populated all your groups with 
Re: > garbage
Re: > data...)
Re: > 
Re: > /Guido
Re: > 
Re: > -----Original Message-----
Re: > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
Re: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: > Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 8:25 PM
Re: > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] w2k authoritative restore
Re: > 
Re: > Auth restore will auth restore attributes that _exist_ in the backup 
Re: > as they were at the time of backup, but not auth restore attributes 
Re: > that didn't exist. Ergo it kind of works as a merge of old attributes 
Re: > that were set and new attributes that were set post backup.
Re: > 
Re: > ... So is the CA data perhaps in attributes that are not set on the 
Re: > backup objects?
Re: > 
Re: > Further like we merge the attributes that are auth restored over any 
Re: > existing ones, we also merge in objects as well. So a new object post 
Re: > backup will not get "auth restored" (i.e. the closes thing woudl be to
Re: 
Re: > delete the new object)
Re: > 
Re: > Just grasping at straws, don't know much specifics about CA or ADC. 
Re: > 
Re: > Cheers,
Re: > Brett Shirley (msft)
Re: > AD Developer
Re: > 
Re: > On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
Re: > 
Re: > > dear all, sorry to "bomb" the list with queries, but was hoping to 
Re: > > get
Re: > 
Re: > > a heads up on this issue of authoritative restore subsequent to a 
Re: > > directory modification using ADC
Re: > > 
Re: > > we are testing the procedure of rollback of a domain that has been 
Re: > > modified using an ADC connection agreement
Re: > > 
Re: > > i have a backup set taken prior to the processing of the ADC CA and 
Re: > > can confirm the successful restore of a DC to the prior state. (no 
Re: > > email address in the user objects no CA objects etc)
Re: > > 
Re: > > despite the fact that this data is restored authoritatively as soon 
Re: > > as
Re: > 
Re: > > the restored DC is attached to the network with its DS started the 
Re: > > data prior to the CA processing is overwritten with the data from an
Re: 
Re: > > another server
Re: > > 
Re: > > have followed what seems to be a simple process of auth restore;
Re: > > 
Re: > > 1. boot into DS restore
Re: > > 2. restore system state and c: using the original location / always 
Re: > > overwrite 3. restart 4. boot into DS restore mode 5. run ntdsutil / 
Re: > > authoritative restore / restore database
Re: > > 
Re: > > my first thought was that the ADC has created that many chages that 
Re: > > the default version increment of auth restore (7000000) is not 
Re: > > enough for the restored DC to have higher USN than the server that 
Re: > > is left online
Re: > > 
Re: > > have tried auth restore with the verinc value of 10000000 but still 
Re: > > the old data gets overwritten
Re: > > 
Re: > > any clues ?? 
Re: > > 
Re: > > GT
Re: > > 
Re: > > 
Re: > > 
Re: > > 
Re: > > 
Re: > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
Re: > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
Re: > > List archive: 
Re: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
Re: > > 
Re: > 
Re: > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm 
Re: > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm 
Re: > List archive: 
Re: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ 
Re: > 
Re: > 
Re: > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm 
Re: > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm 
Re: > List archive:
Re: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ 
Re: List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
Re: List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
Re: List archive:
Re: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
Re: 
Re: 
Re: List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
Re: List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
Re: 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/

Reply via email to