I love this particular discussion.  I can never quite follow the reasoning why 
about the IM/GC issue... but learn a little more about it each time.

:m:dsm:cci:mvp

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rocky Habeeb
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 12:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Question on Replication Topology

Deji,

Thank you for pointing out my mistake.  You are correct.  DC5 holds all
3 roles, not all 5 roles.  It's the details, I know.  I can just hear
joe now, "SEE, SEE, This is what I'm always talking about!  

Rocky
____________________________________


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 12:01 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Question on Replication Topology


I read it to be that he has 2 domains. He fat-fingered the number of
FSMO roles in the child. But the conclusion is still the same - when all
DCs are GCs in a given domain, IM and GC can co-exist.
 
 
Sincerely,

Dèjì Akómöláfé, 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 Teverovsky, Guy
Sent: Tue 8/16/2005 8:39 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Question on Replication Topology



Rob,

My understanding is that he has two domains in the forest: empty root
and a production child domain. Though the forest root domain is empty,
but it still has 2 domains. 

<quote>

We have:

Forest Root Domain (Empty)

DC1 (Holds all 5 roles)  (the DC offline for 26 hours)

DC2 

One Domain in the Forest

DC4

DC5 (Holds all 5 Roles)

DC6

</quote>

Now looking again at this layout makes me a bit confused as child
domains can hold only 3 FSMOs. Rocky, can you explain what you actually
have there ? "single-domain forest" or "empty root domain + child
domain" ?

Guy

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Williams
(RRE)
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 6:25 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Question on Replication Topology

Actually, if it's a Single Domain Forest then the Infrastructure Master

has no phantoms to keep track of and thus, can be sent anywhere or left

alone as a paper weight.

So while I agree with Jose that it is perfectly fine to move it, doing

so won't really matter until you have phantoms for the infrastructure

master to keep an eye on.

Just my $0.02

Have a great day!

Rob

-----Original Message-----

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Medeiros, Jose

Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 11:17 AM

To: [email protected]

Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Question on Replication Topology

You are correct. However if you have two DC's it doesn't hurt to offload

the infrastructure master role to the DC that dose not have the other 4

roles, even if it's in a single domain forest.

Jose :-)

-----Original Message-----

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Teverovsky, Guy

Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 8:09 AM

To: [email protected]

Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Question on Replication Topology


Am I missing something or having Infrastructure Master running on GC is

an issue in multi-domain forest ?

Guy

-----Original Message-----

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rocky Habeeb

Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 9:28 PM

To: [email protected]

Subject: [ActiveDir] Question on Replication Topology

Dear List Members (Whom I have a hard time figuring out how you all have

so much time to help us "not quite up to speed, but severely overtasked

Administrators");

After a power failure took a Forest Root DC offline over the weekend

(for 26 hours), I came in today to find my replication "in question".

Repadmin /Showreps does not show any errors however, it shows

inconsistent Replication partners.  Here is my question;

We have:

Forest Root Domain (Empty)

DC1 (Holds all 5 roles)  (the DC offline for 26 hours)

DC2 

One Domain in the Forest

DC4

DC5 (Holds all 5 Roles)

DC6

Everyone is W2K3 (no Service Packs) and everyone is a GC and everyone is

a DNS server.

I was positive that I had the Forest Root and Domain at Windows Server

2003 Forest Functional Level but now when I go to AD Domains and Trusts

and click the Forest Root Domain and right click Properties I get:

Domain Functional Level = Windows 2000 mixed

Forest Functional Level = Windows 2000

When I go to AD Domains and Trusts and click the Domain and right click

Properties I get:

Domain Functional Level = Windows Server 2003

Forest Functional Level = Windows 2000

I must have miscalculated, but that's not my question.

In my AD Sites and Services, I have connection objects that have

automatically been generated for each DC but they are inconsistent.  ie:

DC1 goes to DC2 and DC6

DC2 goes to DC1 and DC5

DC4 goes to DC5 and DC6

DC5 goes to DC4 and DC6

DC6 goes to DC1 and DC4 and DC5

The question is, "Shouldn't they all have automatically generated

connection objects to everybody else and if they don't, is it just a

matter of me adding the manual new connection object?"  Or am I seeing a

properly configured Sites and Services.  If not, is part of my problem

that I have not got the Forest Root at FFL?

Thanks in advance people for any assistance.  This list is so valuable,

it's not funny.  (Seriously!)

______________________________

Rocky Habeeb

Microsoft Systems Administrator

James W. Sewall Company

136 Center Street

Old Town, Maine 04468

207.827.4456

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

www.jws.com

______________________________


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