Just out of curiosity, but do you find this behavior unusual? Would you think it's still reasonable to be able to introduce, for example, a 2000 DFL Domain in a 2003 FFL Forest? Were you thinking of a merger/migration scenario where perhaps you need to migrate in a 2000 Domain into your 2003 Forest?
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 2:50 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] FFL 2003 is one-size-fit-all? > > Thanks, Joe. I'd just take it as a given - especially now > that you've chimed in :)) - and go with the flow. > > > 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 joe > Sent: Tue 12/20/2005 12:28 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] FFL 2003 is one-size-fit-all? > > > > I have not seen much documentation on it but it is "sort of" > mentioned here > (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;32269 > 2). The specific mention is only "After the forest functional > level is raised, domain controllers that are running earlier > operating systems cannot be introduced into the forest. For > example, if you raise forest functional levels to Windows > Server 2003, domain controllers that are running Windows NT > 4.0 or Windows 2000 Server cannot be added to the forest.". > > Personally, I would take the fact that you can only add > domain functional level domains as a given... A forest > functional mode forest is a forest which has to have all > domains at domain functional level. Once there, you don't get > to go backwards so any new added domains would HAVE to be added at > 2003 domain functional level. > > joe > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 2:54 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ActiveDir] FFL 2003 is one-size-fit-all? > > I don't remember reading this in any of the materials I've > seen to date. Is it true that after flipping the Forest > Functional Level to Windows 2003, any subsequent domain added > to the Forest after the flip will default to DFL 2003? This > appears to be the case in my tests, and I am wondering if I > am doing something wrong. > > If this is correct, does anyone have any material discussing > this behavior - or know why this is so? Of course, I am aware > of the requirements to "get to" > FFL 2003. I am just looking for a discussion/documentation of > the restriction (if any) of introducing new domains into that > environment. > > Thanks > > > 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/
