Joe, the comment was that TRANSFERRING the roles would be something trivial to do, not seizing the roles. I also agree, scripting is the difference between an admin who knows where to click, and an admin who knows what is going on when he clicks, when his mouse takes focus in the window, when the cursor hovers over a selection, etc, etc. Scripting may be like in the end of the Matrix when Neo sees all the green and black monochrome code when he looks around, a point in time where you can see the world around you for the code it is, and then you are able to master all aspects of it. It all depends on what pill these admins want to swallow.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 10:06 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer I am not completely on board with a seize being trivial. Sure it is trivial in the act of doing it, but do you fully understand what is going on under the covers? With a FSMO transfer you are going from a known state to a known state in a controlled fashion. The new roleholder can talk to the old roleholder and understand EXACTLY what is going on so have a seamless move. A seize is going from an unknown state to a known state. For a role that doesn't have a state to worry about which is most of them, that is fine. But the RID master definitely has state and to a lesser extent so does the PDC master. Seizing a role isn't just a simple matter of popping in a value into an attribute and saying "Done!". Well it could be, but you could get burned if that is all you do. I agree that it will be tough to convince one group to do something the other way. I do hope though that people think about what has been written and don't think seizing a role is trivial because the command to do it is easy to run. I am glad it is easy, the last thing you want is for a hard process to be required to rescue your system when you have issues. On the comment that transferring roles isn't a normal operating procedure. Maybe not in some places but it is a perfectly normal operating procedure, certainly more standard or normal than a seize. Transferring the PDC role in NT could be a bit painful at times but it is easy as pie in AD. I recall having a couple of occasions in the very beginning (first half 2000) where I got a trifle nervous at first from previous NT issues but quickly got over it. I don't think twice about moving roles. Heck we didn't even have to submit change control for that, we would just move the roles and send an email to the change list saying it had been done. It was considered SOP for maintaining domain operations. Finally and the last I will say about it... for the longest time and maybe even still I haven't looked lately MS said that the seize was the course of last resort, use it when the transfer fails. I realize MS warns about a lot of things but usually they have some basis for doing so. And if that isn't enough... if seizing roles was such a non-item, why wouldn't you just have a seize operation? Why have a transfer and a seize and cause this confusion? If they were the same, wouldn't you just have a single move the role button and no other mechanism whatsoever? -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Figueroa, Johnny Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 4:53 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer I think what was meant about the "trivial" part is around the seizing of the roles not the transfer. I would love to have much of the ntdsutil functionality built into the UI, even if at some point it requires you to reboot/restore, whatever. I don't think either camp is going to convince the other that you should or shouldn't transfer roles prior to some maintenance. It is almost a personality thing. I prefer not to transfer the role and deal with the possibility that I may need to seize it, on the rare case that something goes drastically wrong that I can not recover from before the role is actually needed. You architected the roles on specific DCs for a reason, if I forget to move it back I may end up with a DC hosting a role for a long time that I never meant to. Also, I don't consider transferring roles around part of the normal operating procedures. But that's just me. Thanks -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cace, Andrew Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 2:26 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer It is available in the AD snap-ins. In AD Domains & Trusts, you can transfer the Domain Naming master by right-clicking the name of the snap-in in tree-view and choosing Operations Master. In ADUC, right-click the name of the domain and choose Operations Master to transfer the RID, PDC, and Infrastructure masters. In the Schema Management snapin, you can transfer the Schema master by right-clicking Active Directory Schema and choosing Operations Master. Next question...Why isn't there a single place to click all of these? -Andrew -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 3:09 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer <stupid question alert> If the task is that trivial If the benefit is so great Why isn't it part of the AD snap ins as a one button task? <sincerely, who needs scripting when you can ask for a gui/wizard or button instead> David Adner wrote: > I'm not debating the effort it takes to make the change. I'm saying I > don't see the point in devoting whatever amount of effort it takes for > something that's going to provide benefit only, IMO, an extremely rare > case. And if that case happened, the corrective action is also a > trivial process. And again, I'm not saying I don't see your point; I > just don't agree with it. > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bahta >> Nathaniel V Contractor NASIC/SCNA >> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 12:32 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer >> >> That process is trivial in itself. It does not take much to transfer >> the roles before you conduct maintenance on a server. Why not do it? >> It will save you cleaning up metadata after you seize a role of a >> failed operations master. Sounds like a stitch in nine saves time >> concept to me. I do not intend on taking every proactive measure >> either, but when it comes to the small and quickly implemented >> measures that could save plenty of time, I try to utilize all of them >> available. >> >> Is that agreeable? >> >> Nathaniel Vincent Bahta >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Adner >> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 1:24 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer >> >> Any proper maintenance plan has a backout plan and a recovery plan, >> so I am preparing for the possibility of an unexpected problem. If >> I'm pulled into a dark room because something goes wrong then I >> should feel confident I'll leave that room with my hide mostly >> intact; it may be slightly singed, but I can live with that. If >> management isn't the reasonable type then that's a different issue. >> >> If your philosophy is to take every proactive measure ahead of time >> possible, then that's fine. I just don't see the point with regards >> to FSMO roles when the recovery action is a relatively trivial >> process. This is obviously a matter of personal preference so I'm >> not trying to convince others to change. I just found the concept >> unusual so I thought I'd share. >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 10:16 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer >>> >>> I would rather, as stated earlier, assess the risk and then act >>> appropriately. The original poster never defined 'maintenance' in >>> detail. >>> >>> The original post did state that the box would be down for ~2 hours >>> for maintenance. This is clearly more than a patch and a >>> >> reboot. We've >> >>> been over that scenario and concluded that it carries a lesser risk. >>> >>> As joe said, if the maintenance all goes badly wrong, do >>> >> you want to >> >>> be pulled into a dark room and questioned as to why you did not >>> prepare for that eventuality? >>> >>> >>> neil >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan >>> Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] >>> Sent: 30 November 2005 15:29 >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer >>> >>> Okay define maintenance please? >>> >>> Patching? >>> Service Pack? >>> Applying QFEs? >>> Performance tuning? >>> What? >>> >>> Is there a level of maintenance that would cause you to move FSMO's >>> and not? >>> >>> Like for example, if I'm patching, I've tested the patch, I'm >>> reasonably expecting a favorable outcome otherwise I wouldn't be >>> deploying, I have a backup. >>> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I think we've missed the essence of the original post :) >>>> >>> The DCs are >>> >>>> not just being rebooted, they are being 'maintained' and >>>> >>> will be down >>> >>>> for ~ 2 hours. That means to me, that either a s/w or h/w >>>> >> change is >> >>>> going to occur which could go horribly wrong. Faced with this >>>> situation, I would definitely transfer the roles. >>>> If the DC were merely being rebooted and nothing else is >>>> >>> scheduled to >>> >>>> occur, I would not transfer roles. >>>> The above 2 scenarios are very different - if one were to >>>> >> perform a >> >>>> risk analysis the actions taken to mitigate those risks would be >>>> suitably different. >>>> neil >>>> >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> >>>> -- >>>> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of >>>> >>> *David Adner >>> >>>> *Sent:* 29 November 2005 23:26 >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer >>>> >>>> I would only agree if you told me your DC's regularly >>>> >> fail to come >> >>>> back after a reboot. And if you did tell me that I'd have to say >>>> you're doing something wrong. >>>> I suppose I don't consider rebooting a DC to be quite the >>>> >> dangerous >> >>>> act as others do. To what degree is this taken? If it holds >>>> >>> a standard >>> >>> >>>> Primary zone do you transfer that role, too? If it's the >>>> >>> PDCE of the >>> >>>> forest root domain and you transfer the role, do you also >>>> >>> reconfigure >>> >>>> the new PDCE to manually synchronize time from an authoritative >>>> source? I mean, if we're going to work under the >>>> >> assumption that a >> >>>> reboot is a regularly catastrophic causing event then >>>> >> it's probably >> >>>> time to switch OS's. >>>> Is it possible something unexpectedly horrible can happen >>>> >>> as part of a >>> >>> >>>> reboot? Sure. But it better be the exception. And with >>>> >>> regards to FSMO >>> >>> >>>> roles, which, barring some specific technical requirement they be >>>> readily available, the temporary outage of them is typically a >>>> transparent event and shouldn't require added >>>> >>> administrative overhead >>> >>>> in transferring them back and forth. Accepting that a >>>> >> catastrophic >> >>>> event is an exception, then you follow your documented and tested >>>> activities to recover from that exception; ie: you seize >>>> >> the roles, >> >>>> restore from backup, etc. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ---------- >>> >>>> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On >>>> >> Behalf Of *Rich >> >>>> Milburn >>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 29, 2005 4:26 PM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer >>>> >>>> Yeah but having "seize the FSMOs instead of moving >>>> >> them" as your >> >>>> fallback plan is like making sure you have a current backup in >>>> case "yanking the power cord instead of Start > Shutdown > >>>> Restart" causes file system corruption J >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> //------------------------------------------------------------ >>> ---------- >>> -/// >>> >>>> ///Rich Milburn/// >>>> ///MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services/// >>>> Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development >>>> Applebee's International, Inc.// >>>> //4551 W. 107th St// >>>> //Overland Park//, KS 66207// >>>> //913-967-2819// >>>> >>>> >>> //------------------------------------------------------------ >>> ---------- >>> // >>> >>>> ///"I love the smell of red herrings in the morning" - >>>> >>> anonymous// >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 29, 2005 11:56 AM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] FSMO role transfer >>>> >>>> If something went wrong you could still seize the FSMO >>>> >>> roles as an >>> >>>> option rather than doing a transfer. Of course the >>>> >>> procedures for >>> >>>> all of these for the 5 FSMOs should be documented just in case >>>> needed.. >>>> >>>> Chuck >>>> >>>> / >>>> >>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ---------- >>> >>>> *-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY >>>> >>> NOTICE-------* >>> >>>> PRIVILEGED / CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this >>>> message or any attachments. This information is strictly >>>> confidential and may be subject to attorney-client >>>> >>> privilege. This >>> >>>> message is intended only for the use of the named >>>> >> addressee. If >> >>>> you are not the intended recipient of this message, >>>> >> unauthorized >> >>>> forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or using such >>>> information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you >>>> have received this in error, you should kindly notify >>>> >> the sender >> >>>> by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this message. >>>> >>> Unauthorized >>> >>>> interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal >>>> law. Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right >>>> >>> to monitor >>> >>>> and review the content of all messages sent to and from this >>>> e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail >>>> >> address may >> >>>> be stored on the Applebee's International, Inc. >>>> >> e-mail system./ >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is >>>> >>> confidential >>> >>>> and intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an >>>> intended recipient of this email please notify the sender >>>> >>> immediately >>> >>>> and delete your copy from your system. You must not copy, >>>> >>> distribute >>> >>>> or take any further action in reliance on it. Email is >>>> >> not a secure >> >>>> method of communication and Nomura International plc >>>> >> ('NIplc') will >> >>>> not, to the extent permitted by law, accept responsibility or >>>> liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness of, or (b) >>>> >>> the presence >>> >>> >>>> of any virus, worm or similar malicious or disabling code >>>> >> in, this >> >>>> message or any attachment(s) to it. If verification of this >>>> >>> email is >>> >>>> sought then please request a hard copy. Unless otherwise >>>> >> stated this >> >>>> email: (1) is not, and should not be treated or relied upon as, >>>> investment research; (2) contains views or opinions that >>>> >> are solely >> >>>> those of the author and do not necessarily represent >>>> >> those of NIplc; >> >>>> (3) is intended for informational purposes only and is not a >>>> recommendation, solicitation or offer to buy or sell >>>> >> securities or >> >>>> related financial instruments. NIplc does not provide investment >>>> services to private customers. Authorised and regulated by the >>>> Financial Services Authority. Registered in England no. >>>> >> 1550505 VAT >> >>>> No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 St >>>> >> Martin's-le-Grand, London, >> >>>> EC1A 4NP. A member of the Nomura group of companies. >>>> >>> 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/ >>> >>> >>> >>> PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is >>> >> confidential >> >>> and intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an >>> intended recipient of this email please notify the sender >>> >> immediately >> >>> and delete your copy from your system. >>> You must not copy, distribute or take any further action in >>> >> reliance >> >>> on it. Email is not a secure method of communication and Nomura >>> International plc ('NIplc') will not, to the extent >>> >> permitted by law, >> >>> accept responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or >>> completeness of, or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar >>> malicious or disabling code in, this message or any >>> >> attachment(s) to >> >>> it. If verification of this email is sought then please >>> >> request a hard >> >>> copy. Unless otherwise stated this email: (1) is not, and >>> >> should not >> >>> be treated or relied upon as, investment research; (2) >>> >> contains views >> >>> or opinions that are solely those of the author and do not >>> >> necessarily >> >>> represent those of NIplc; (3) is intended for informational >>> >> purposes >> >>> only and is not a recommendation, solicitation or offer to >>> >> buy or sell >> >>> securities or related financial instruments. NIplc does >>> >> not provide >> >>> investment services to private customers. Authorised and >>> >> regulated by >> >>> the Financial Services Authority. Registered in England no. >>> 1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 St >>> Martin's-le-Grand, London, EC1A 4NP. A member of the >>> >> Nomura group of >> >>> companies. >>> >>> 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/ > > -- Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days? http://www.threatcode.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/
