|
Here are some sources to reference in your design process.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/topics/identity/idmanage/P1Plat_4.mspx
Couple of points to Raise,
Good Luck….
Todd
From: Grillenmeier,
Guido [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
yep, done it several times this way - at least for the users. Depending on how your machines need to talk to the internal servers, you might not even need to setup a trust. But if you don't get around it, you could still limit it's reach using selective authentication.
/Guido
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] We are looking at redesigning our extranet and are considering a separate forest for the extranet users and eventually most of the resources needed for the extranet will be put into that forest. My thinking is that since a domain isn't a true security boundary and it really won't cost us more to bring up a forest vs. domain why not go with a separate forest. The users in the extranet forest won't necessarily need access to the internal systems but some of the machines will need to talk to internal servers so I assume at some point we will need a trust relationship. My question is simply what am I missing and has anyone done similar setups?
Holland + Knight
|
Title: [ActiveDir] Trusting Domain SIDs
- RE: [ActiveDir] Extranet's Myrick, Todd (NIH/CIT)
- RE: [ActiveDir] Extranet's Renouf, Phil
- RE: [ActiveDir] Extranet's Rodney Gardiner
- RE: [ActiveDir] Extranet's Justin_Leney
- RE: [ActiveDir] Extranet's travis.abrams
- Re: [ActiveDir] Extranet's Roger Seielstad
