Choices are good, and I am all for it except those nasty "paper or plastic,
venti or grande, skimmed or half-and-half" choices :)
 
When it comes to matters like this, I defer to your superior judgement.
But.....how does AD-intg secondaries address either of your scenarios? I can
see putting constraints on the "writeability" of ad-intg zones will be
desirable and effective for your purposes, but AD-intg secs .... hmmmmm......

 
And, talking about choices, wasn't it you who was asking to have a new flavor
of highly locked down Windows for servers alone? You wanted the "relevant
people" to strip it down and lock it so that tight that the operators would
find it very difficult to hurt themselves. How does that fit into the
"choices" option? Maybe Joe was the one asking for this. Maybe it wasn't you.
But since you and Joe seem to agree on most things, I would like to see a
reconciliation of desires. 
 
 
Sincerely,

D�j� Ak�m�l�f�, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday?  -anon

________________________________

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dean Wells
Sent: Fri 11/19/2004 9:35 AM
To: Send - AD mailing list
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Why no AD integrated DNS secondary zones?



Real scenario - The way in which 2003 AD integrates the _msdcs subdomain
(now a zone) causes it to replicate forest wide.  This one zone subsequently
becomes writable on every K3 DNS(/DC) server within the forest.  I didn't
ask it to do that, I didn't intentionally make a key component of AD
available for modification ... all I said was "replicate it better"
(obviously that's highly simplified but you get the idea :-).

Hypothetical scenario - I'd like a non-AD related DNS zone available at
every one of my hundreds of sites.  Each site has DCs/DNS servers running
K3.  I'd like the zone's writability constrained (and enforced) to the
head-office site alone.  The moment I AD integrate to take advantage of the
vastly superior replication semantics, I inadvertently expose it to offsite
change ... again, all I wanted was to exploit replication not the
multimaster nature of AD. 

I can, of course, re-ACL the whole thing but, believe me, that's more pain
than I'm prepared to inflict on myself ... you, on the other hand, may like
that ;-).

My feeling is simply this; we would be better served by being offered a
choice as to which features are made available when a zone is AD integrated.

--
Dean Wells
MSEtechnology
* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://msetechnology.com


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 11:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Why no AD integrated DNS secondary zones?

I see what you are saying, but ..... why would I want to store the zone info
of DomainA in the AD of DomainB in an independent/disjointed, non-trusting
environment? What would be the compelling reason? Would something improve or
work better if this is implemented?


Sincerely,

D�j� Ak�m�l�f�, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday?  -anon

________________________________

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dean Wells
Sent: Fri 11/19/2004 8:24 AM
To: Send - AD mailing list
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Why no AD integrated DNS secondary zones?



Deji,

There would a concept of "AD integrated secondaries" had MS decided to write
it; it may be desirable (to some) to maintain read-only yet AD replicated
zones.  I guess the point in question is - MS didn't.  I've asked the
question directly to those that chose not to within MS and their response
was quite simply "because we didn't :)".

--
Dean Wells
MSEtechnology
* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://msetechnology.com


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 11:13 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Why no AD integrated DNS secondary zones?

Because when it's integrated, there is no concept of "secondaries" as we
understood it to be in pre-2Kx world. It's there in AD, and any DC can see
and write to it. Now, if you are secondarying the zones on another server
located in another forest/network, why would you want to store that info in
your own AD. You will not be modifying that zone locally on the secondary
anyway. Or, are you intending to?


Sincerely,

D�j� Ak�m�l�f�, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday?  -anon

________________________________

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Ken Cornetet
Sent: Fri 11/19/2004 6:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Why no AD integrated DNS secondary zones?



OK, integrated stub zones are cool, but I'm curious - why did MS stop there?
Why no integrated secondaries?
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/


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/

Reply via email to