You've been reading too much SBS marketing material. SBS is just plain old windows server, exchange (and possibly SQL and ISA) with a few wizards and a POP3 connector thrown in. It is not "specifically designed" for anything. The only difference is that it is artificially hobbled to limit the number of users, and prevent domain trusts.
It is not limited in functionality (other than the user and trust limits). Running DHCP on a 2K domain controller is a security risk. The same vulnerability exists in SBS2000. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ASB Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 8:59 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] FW: Exchange 2003 on DC SBS is specifically designed to support this configuration, for a specific number of users, and it is limited in functionality re: normal domain controller options. - ASB Cheap, Fast, Secure -- Pick Any TWO. http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/ On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:24:27 -0500, Ken Cornetet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Um, SBS users don't have a choice... > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 3:44 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] FW: Exchange 2003 on DC > > > > Don't install Exchange on a Domain Controller, even you Michael B. > Smith > > Article ID:994678345 > Last Review:October 28, 2004 > Revision:1.0 > This article was previously published under Q994678345 > > SYMPTOMS > > In a Windows 2000 domain some people like to install Exchange on a > Domain Controller. They also like to use them for file and print as > well or for other not authentication/authorization services. They > sometimes find they run into security and/or stability issues. > > CAUSE > This behavior occurs typically occurs when because they installed > products on a domain controller which is supposed to be the bastion of > your enterprise security, not handling menial services such as exchange and file > sharing et alii. > RESOLUTION > To resolve this problem, remove the non authentication/authorization > related services from the domain controller. > > STATUS > Microsoft has confirmed that this is a problem in the real world. This > problem was first corrected when people started treating the DCs like > a KDC and not a regular server. > > > ________________________________ > > APPLIES TO > All versions of Windows that run as Domain Controllers > > > > :o) > > joe > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael B. > Smith > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 7:53 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [ActiveDir] FW: Exchange 2003 on DC > > > > I've run across a couple of KB articles regarding the issues of > promoting/demoting a DC under Exchange 2003 (on the same box). Shame > on me, I didn't bookmark them. > > Does anyone have those handy? My google-fu is not up-to-par today > apparently...the one's I've found (plus summary) are: > > 822179 - don't change DC status after Exchange is installed 305504 - > impact of making DC a GC with Exchange installed 305065 - impact of > removing a GC from a DC with Exchange installed 829361 - long shut > down time on a DC when Exchange is installed 822575 - DS2MB stops > running when DC status is removed and Exchange is installed > > The only one I've found that directly affects the search I'm on is the > last (822575). > > Thanks, > M 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/
