Darren, 

Great info:  I have grown concerned about our environment as well.  We have
over 27 different organizations within our AD, and possibly 50 different
delegations.  We normally allow 4 GPO's per delegation, so we could be
seeing this issue in the future as well.

Thanks,

Todd

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Kingslan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 10:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] GPO and Sysvol size

Darren,

Yep - this helps a ton.

This is what I was looking for - first, this type of guidance, and second -
something I was completely unaware of.  One thing that I failed to mention
that you still provided an answer for is that our domains are not yet on
2k3, and the size of the Sysvol became an alarm issue that I raised with the
team that is doing the upgrades.  However, I still have the interim
solution, and the solution to implement once the domains are upgraded.

Thanks - much appreciated!

-rtk

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 1:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] GPO and Sysvol size

Rick-
As you probably noticed, within each GPO that implements Administrative
Template policy, the ADM files are stored in the SYSVOL portion of that GPO.
If you notice the size of those collective ADMs, especially after
SP2 came out, each GPO can have well over a meg of ADM files stored in
SYSVOL. Windows 2003 supports the ability to edit GPOs without looking for
the ADMs in SYSVOL. So you would basically delete all of the ADMs from all
of your SYSVOL replicas and then enable the policies described here. 

There are two policies related to this. The first disables the automatic
updating feature where a workstation that is editing a GPO automatically
uploads its ADM files if they are newer than or are not found in SYSVOL.
If you disable this automatic updating on all workstations that might try to
edit GPOs, you can keep new ADMs from being copied up. This policy is found
at User Configuration\Administrative Templates\System\Group Policy\Turn off
automatic update of ADM files 

The second policy only works when editing GPOs from Windows Server 2003, but
it essentially tells any 2003 machine with the policy set, that when editing
the GPO, only use the ADMs found in the %windir%\inf folder on that machine.
This policy is found at Computer Configuration\Administrative
Templates\System\Group Policy\Always use local ADM files for Group Policy
Object Editor. Again, this one only works for Windows 2003--it doesn't work
on XP. So, if you enable it, all GP editing has to be done from Windows
2003.

The only other method I've seen is a more manual approach. You delete all
ADMs from all SYSVOL replicas *except* the PDC role-holder. Then, you create
a DFS filter on SYSVOL to not replicate *.adm files. Since the GP editor
will always default to the PDC emulator by default, you will be able to edit
your GPOs as normal, since the ADMs will still be on the DC you're focused
on. However, if the PDC role-holder is down or an administrator attempts to
focus on a different DC for GP editing, well, then they won't see any Admin.
Template policy options when they open a GPO. 

Hope that helps

Darren

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 8:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ActiveDir] GPO and Sysvol size

All - 

OK, I rarely ask questions here (and, haven't been posting many answers of
late either...)

I have a bit of a problem, and I know the answer, but the solution is much
easier than the politics and the reality of it.

Our Sysvol has grown to rather huge proportions with the acquisition of a
few companies and our reliance on GPO to lock down and manage our desktop
environments based on specific customer demands.  I'll be the first to admit
that there are too many hands in the admin role, but it's currently not a
battle that I can win - unless I come up with a specific reason that folks
should not have specific rights.

Namely, in the current instance, it's the right to create GPOs.  In the past
4 mos, I have gone from about 100 GPOs to about 450.  In our environment,
450 GPOs is equal to about 650MB in Sysvol.  Most of the GPOs are due to
very specific need by customer requirement - the lockdown of a desktop
because Customer A requires this, while the next shift is Customer B, who
requires something else.

In looking at the GPOs, there doesn't seem to me to be a real way to reduce
or combine them to consolidate the sheer number.  Certainly there can be
optimizations, but I doubt that the total of the reductions will be of any
real substance.

What am I missing in all of this?  What information would the other smart
folks here need to help me technically and politically solve the problem?
If you don't understand the breadth of the problem - ask.  I can elaborate.

TIA!

Rick Kingslan  MCSE, MCSA, MCT, CISSP
Microsoft MVP:
Windows Server / Directory Services
Windows Security (Affiliate)
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
WebLog - www.msmvps.com/willhack4food
 

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