Thanks.
What i'm worried about is that netbios/tcp is turned off and they have
no wins servers.
how will this affect an external trust like the kind being attempted?
Thanks again

On 8/10/05, Rick Kingslan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See inline below....
> 
> Rick
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern
> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 5:32 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] AD migration
> 
> Do you mean check off "associate with external account" on the user attrib?
> 
> [RTK] If you mean the ACE "Associate with External Account" in the ACL of
> the Mail-enabled disabled user - which should have a new entry of [domain in
> other forest\user], yep.  That's the one.  I seem to remember that there is
> at least one maybe two more ACEs that need to be checked as well.  Should
> become apparent pretty quickly.  If you can't find it - I'll dig it up.
> 
> Also, how do they see the GAL in the old forest?
> How does outlook in the new domain find the gc's in the old domain(i
> think the answer to this is when it points to the exchange server in
> the old forest, dsproxy will direct them to a gc in the exchange
> server's site?)
> 
> [RTK]  The Exchange server in the old forest still has associated GCs, so
> yes - the GCs that are located by the Exchange servers are still used for
> the purposes that they are needed for.
> 
> also, i tought a lot of things would break when disabling netbios/tcp,
> like ESM,outlook pre 2003,exmerge,etc.
> 
> [RTK]  It's important to understand a specific distinction - especially when
> related to E2k and E2k3.  The dependency is on NetBIOS name resolution - not
> specifically the Application layer API NetBIOS.  Remember - NetBIOS is not a
> protocol.  NetBEUI is.  Neither is routable.  So, if you don't have NBT and
> have WINS - you're going to work fine with what you state above.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> On 8/9/05, Bernard, Aric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Don't worry Kingslan, I won't hold anything against you!  ;)  LOL
> >
> >
> >
> > "Aric" Bernard
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 2:52 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD migration
> >
> > Ummmm....  Well, one - I like simplicity.  Two, I'm not a big fan of
> > WINS.
> > If all we're trying to do is to establish trust for a migration...
> >
> > Besides, Bernard has already been here to show me the error of my ways,
> > Thank you.
> >
> > ;o)
> >
> > Rick
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 4:40 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD migration
> >
> > I didn't read the entire thread so maybe this is answered but this stuck
> > out
> > to me, why isn't WINS going to work?
> >
> > WINS replication nor name resolution doesn't require any trusts nor even
> > authentication. It is all entirely unauthenticated with replication
> > being
> > handled through IP address based "connection agreements" between the
> > source
> > and destination targets.
> >
> > WINS is entirely name resolution, no worries with trusts or anything
> > else in
> > terms of that name resolution.
> >
> > When you register in WINS, it is anonymous. When you query WINS it is
> > anonymous. Only when you use the admin interfaces to say look at the
> > database or modify the connection agreements, etc does any form of
> > authentication come into play.
> >
> >
> > When playing across subnets like this with netbios functionality, WINS
> > is
> > generally the best way to go, certainly it is one of the least complex.
> > The
> > only time I would really look at using LMHOSTS is if there was a
> > requirement
> > not to use WINS or you don't want the names to be resolveable to anyone
> > that
> > asks.
> >
> >
> >   joe
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 12:07 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD migration
> >
> > Really, it uses neither.  The NetBT is involved, but because we are on
> > (at
> > present) untrusted domains and forests, WINS isn't going to work.
> >
> > Typically, this is done with an LMHosts file in the \Drivers\ETC
> > directory.
> > The records are going to be very specific, as they will define the
> > domain of
> > the target domain, as well as (typically) the PDC for the target.  A
> > 'mirror' LMHosts will be set up on the other trusting side.
> >
> > As noted, the format of the records is specific, and can be found here:
> >
> > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/180094/
> >
> > And take SPECIAL NOTE that the DOMAIN-NAME records must be EXACTLY as
> > defined, otherwise they will not work.
> >
> > Good luck - it's not daunting, but can be tedious to get working the
> > first
> > time.
> >
> > Rick
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 5:58 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] AD migration
> >
> > Sorry to keep harping- but if you have a trust between a child win2k
> > domain
> > in one forest with a root or child domain in another forest, does this
> > use
> > wins or dns.
> > i know this is not a "real" forest trust and more like an external trust
> > in
> > that its not transitive and uses ntlm and NOT kerberos, but does it also
> > relie on wins/netbios like an old NT-style trust?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > On 8/8/05, Tom Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I just started today so what I got was- they have connectivity to the
> > > child dns server but they cut off connectivity to anything in the root
> >
> > > domain.
> > > the firewall is blocking all root traffic.
> > > this has been like this for a week.
> > > nothing is replicating to the root and there is no access to the _msdc
> >
> > > forest zone.
> > >
> > > The forest is win2k native with an empty root and 1 child domain in a
> > > seperate tree.
> > > they have DA access in the child domain but no DA/EA access in the
> > root.
> > > all the exchange servers(about 10) are in the child domain.
> > > the only recipent policy in the root is the default one and the
> > > enterprise
> > RUS.
> > >
> > >
> > > They want to migrate the child domain and all the resources to a new
> > > forest where we have full control of everything.
> > > i assume we do not need connectivity to the _msdc forest dns zone to
> > > create a trust with the old child domain to migrate everything over(or
> >
> > > anything in the root dns zone).
> > >
> > > I'm not 2nd guessing the Quest guys, this is only for my own
> > education.
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8/8/05, Medeiros, Jose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I am sure Quest's consultant's knows what they are doing. Didn't you
> > have them put a quote and migration plan together prior to the actual
> > migration? Or are you asking these questions because you are second
> > guessing
> > them? Or is this just for your own knowledge?
> > > >
> > > > My understanding is that both domain names have to be different when
> > using ADMT to migrate from a Source Domain to a Target Domain, unless
> > Quest
> > has a tool that over comes this that I am not aware of. Are you trying
> > to
> > keep the same domain name as the source? Microsoft also has a free tool
> > that
> > will allow you to rename the traget 2003 AD domain as after you have
> > completed your migration and decommissioned old DC's.
> > > >
> > > > Jose
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Almeida
> > > > Pinto, Jorge de
> > > > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 2:46 PM
> > > > To: [email protected]; activedirectory
> > > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD migration
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What do you mean with "In fact, they are cut off from the root
> > > > domain
> > pyhsically. "? Do you mean as in there is not replication between the
> > two
> > domains? If yes... dare I ask for how long?
> > > >
> > > > As I know of you can migrate the child domain without the root being
> > available because you will be having a trust between the new domain and
> > the
> > child domain
> > > >
> > > > I still don't understand what you mean... They are cut off from the
> > > > root
> > and the DNS is avlable in the root. I must be missing something. Can you
> > explain a bit more?
> > > >
> > > > Jorge
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > >
> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Tom Kern
> > > > Sent: Mon 8/8/2005 11:08 PM
> > > > To: activedirectory
> > > > Subject: [ActiveDir] AD migration
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I just started working for a company. they used to outsource their
> > > > AD/Exchange but now they're trying to get it back.
> > > >
> > > > Its a 2 tree, 2 domain forest. the root domain is empty.
> > > > this company only has DA access on the child domain. No EA access.
> > > > In fact, they are cut off from the root domain pyhsically.
> > > >
> > > > What they want to do is create a new forest and migrate all
> > > > users,exchange,computers,etc to the new forest and be done with the
> > > > old.
> > > > They are going to use Quest sw and a consultant from Quest for this.
> > > >
> > > > My question is- can this be done without any connectivity to the
> > root?
> > > > both dns zones are in the root so they really don't have any dns
> > > > locally as well(needless to say, you cam imagine what the rep logs
> > > > look like). I'm sure this complicates matters.
> > > > however, the Quest people seem to think this can still work.
> > > > can it?
> > > >
> > > > also, can the new forest have the same domain names as the old one?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks(I'm the guy who posted about his new job jitters about a week
> >
> > > > or 2 ago, and here i am. Their AD is more messed up than I thought
> > > > :)
> > > > )
> > > > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > > > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > > > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
> > recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
> > information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be
> > copied,
> > disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an
> > intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any
> > attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.
> > > > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > > > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > > > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> > > >
> > > > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > > > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > > > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> > > >
> > >
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> >
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> >
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> >
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> >
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> 
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
>
List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/

Reply via email to