I don't think Joe is disagreeing with THAT point. John has the general idea, but his description/explanation is somewhat .... shall we say ......glossy. Sincerely,
Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCT 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 Scott, Anthony Sent: Wed 12/14/2005 8:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs John is right though. If all DCs are GCs, putting the IM role on a GC isn't a problem. Thank You, Anthony Scott Berbee 4690 E. Fulton Dr., Bldg. C Ada, Michigan 49301 (616) 481-9722 (616) 464-6369 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Za Vue Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 10:45 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Reducing number of Global Catalogs Who wrote it? ************************************************************************ *************************************J John Savill John Savill is Director of Technical Infrastructure for Geniant. He is a CISSP, a Security and Messaging MCSE on Windows Server 2003, a six-time MVP, and a Krav Maga instructor. He is also the author of Windows Server 2003 Active Directory Design and Implementation from Packt Publishing (http://www.packtpub.com/book/active_directory). Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ************************************************************************ ***************************************** joe wrote: >Wow who wrote that article in the magazine? That is pretty bad. > >The end result is the same though as stated by everyone so far. If you have >a single domain there is only slight overhead if you make all DCs into GCs. >The only overhead I can really think of is that you will have more global >catalog DNS records and all DCs are listening on an extra 1-2 ports... That >is easily outweighed by the gain of having lots of GC availability. > >Not sure what space usage you would incur by NOT doing it as indicated by >the article. The whole IM role thing is pretty oddly described as well. > > > > > > 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/
