Correction. I meant to say: " Esentutl utility with the /d switch ". Not  
Eseutil /d.



Sincerely, 
Jose Medeiros
ADP | National Account Services
ProBusiness Division | Information Services
925.737.7967 | 408-449-6621 CELL




-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jose Medeiros
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 12:42 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Ntds.dit file corruption


Even if it's SCSI on a RAID 5 Array, you can still have corrupt clusters. A 
power outage or a hard reboot could have damaged the clusters on the drives. 
Try running Chkdsk /r.  And I have an idea, but have not tried it yet, try 
running Eseutil /d after the chkdsk completes since it creates a new 
database, it may repair the problem.
http://www.mcpmag.com/columns/article.asp?EditorialsID=330

Jose
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 12:13 AM
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Ntds.dit file corruption


> Nope just confirmed SCSI ...but there's still Dell hardware to lay blame 
> on here  ;-)
>
> Brian Desmond wrote:
>
>>I think those are SATA only?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Brian Desmond
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> c - 312.731.3132
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley, 
>>CPA
>>aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
>>Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 2:21 AM
>>To: [email protected]
>>Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Ntds.dit file corruption
>>
>>http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/products/pedge/en/sc1420_specs.pdf
>>
>>Well he said it's a Dell [ugh] 1420 but do not know if SATA or SCSI.
>>
>>Jose Medeiros wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hmm.. I have never experienced this with either McAfee or Symantec AV on 
>>>any of the DC's that I have built and or maintened.  Have you had a 
>>>chance to run chkdsk /r yet? More then likely the problem is bad clusters 
>>>on the drive which caused the NTDS.DIT file to become corrupt.
>>>
>>>Was this server built using IDE /ATA/SATA drives?
>>>
>>>
>>>Jose
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS 
>>>Rocks [MVP]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>To: <[email protected]>
>>>Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 10:58 PM
>>>Subject: [ActiveDir] Ntds.dit file corruption
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>SBS box [with Windows 2003 sp1 since September]
>>>>
>>>>RE: [ActiveDir] Database Corruption:
>>>>http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg32676.html
>>>>
>>>>We have a SBS 2003 sp1 box with a corrupt ntds.dit that the Consultant 
>>>>and PSS have been banging on.  Could not get the services back running, 
>>>>changed the RPC service to local system and some service came back up [I 
>>>>don't have all the details but the consultant opened a support case of 
>>>>SRX051202605433].
>>>>Bottom line they are about going to give up and start a restore but 
>>>>before they do that I'd like to get the view of the AD gods and 
>>>>goddesses around here.  From all that I've seen, read, seen in the SBS 
>>>>newsgroup, the corruption of ntds.dit is rare to nil and an underlying 
>>>>cause is hardware issues [raid, disk subsystem].  This doesn't just 
>>>>happen.
>>>>The VAP asked if not properly excluding the ad databases from the a/v 
>>>>would cause this/trigger this and my expectation is 'no', given that I 
>>>>doubt the majority of us in SBSland properly set up exclusions
>>>>Virus scanning recommendations on a Windows 2000 or on a Windows Server 
>>>>2003 domain controller:
>>>>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;822158
>>>>
>>>>If this were my hardware and box, I'd be putting this sucker on the 
>>>>operating table and getting an autopsy before putting it back online.
>>>>
>>>>Are we right in being paranoid now about this hardware?  For you guys in 
>>>>big server land you'd just slide over another box into that server role.
>>>>
>>>>---------------------------------------
>>>>Stupid question alert....
>>>>
>>>>Okay so we know that having a secondary/additional domain controller is 
>>>>a good thing even in SBSland...but question.... many times the second 
>>>>server in SBSland is a terminal server box because we do not support TS 
>>>>in app mode on our PDCs. So we've established that having a domain 
>>>>controller and a terminal server is a security issue [see Windows 
>>>>Security resource kit, NIST Terminal services hardening guide, etc 
>>>>etc....]  If our second server is a member server handing out TS 
>>>>externally, should that be a candidate for the additional DC?  Are the 
>>>>issues of TS on a DC ... true for 'any' DC?  Would it be better than to 
>>>>Vserver/VPC a Win2k3 inside a workstation in the network if a third 
>>>>server box was not feasible?
>>>>
>>>>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