From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adams, Kenneth W (Ken)
My understanding of sites is that each site must have at least one DC. If my understanding is correct, your planned action to decomm the Site B DC would lead to the removal of Site B and its incorporation into Site A. As long as the computers in Site B have the proper DNS server addresses, you should have no problem (note the operative word 'should').
Ken Adams, MCSE -----Original Message----- I am about to investigate and test DNS site coverage and would like to seek the views and opinions of others. Scenario:
Currently,
each of these 2 sites has a DC installed locally. Proposal
and requirements: Questions:
I had always assumed the latter to be true, but this view has been challenged and the former was suggested as necessary, instead :) Any offers? Thanks,
Neil Ruston - MVP dir services ============================================================================== |
Title: Message
- [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behaviour Ruston, Neil
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... Adams, Kenneth W \(Ken\)
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... Paresh Nhathalal
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... John Reijnders
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... Ruston, Neil
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... Ruston, Neil
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... Paresh Nhathalal
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... Free, Bob
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... Gil Kirkpatrick
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... Gil Kirkpatrick
- RE: [ActiveDir] DNS and site coverage behavi... Jorge de Almeida Pinto
