123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567

alluserswhoneedsomethingdonewhentheylogintoacomputerhere1

anothergroupofuserswithspecialrequirementsorneedsgohere11

groups that long ^^ ...  wow.... like paragraphs
That's amazing

Regards,

Ken Jensen
Technical Support Specialist III
Capistrano Unified School District
San Juan Capistrano, California
(949)283-8375 (949)234-5500
I've had a lovely evening, but this wasn't it....

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 6:24 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [SPAM?] RE: [ActiveDir] Net localgroup limitation?

Oh no, I am not into memorizing what I can stumble upon and figure out
as
needed. :o)

Plus that doesn't say anything about groups. ;o)

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley,
CPA
aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 2:35 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [SPAM?] RE: [ActiveDir] Net localgroup limitation?

Naming conventions in Active Directory for computers, domains, sites,
and
OUs:
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=909264

Study it... pop quiz in the morning...

joe wrote:

> So I am confused, are you good now?
>  
> The 57 characters sounds familiar to me, that might be the limit I hit

> when migrating in Domain Local groups into 2K several years ago. I 
> would have to look at some standards docs I wrote for that company to 
> be sure. I ended up just saying, ok for now on, max length of a group 
> is X where X was the length of the user definable part of the group 
> name plus the part we required for it to be in AD (basically a 
> building suffix and a dash for a prefix).
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Freddy 
> HARTONO
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2006 5:31 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* RE: [SPAM?] RE: [ActiveDir] Net localgroup limitation?
>
> Hi Joe,
>  
> Yeah thanks for that, I was scratching my head trying to add a new 
> admin group with 57 characters long.
>
> Thank you and have a splendid day!
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Freddy Hartono
> Group Support Engineer
> InternationalSOS Pte Ltd
> mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> phone: (+65) 6330-9785
>
>  
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *joe
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2006 12:35 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [SPAM?] RE: [ActiveDir] Net localgroup limitation?
>
> According to the schema the sAMAccountName must be 0-256, however, 
> this is one of the famous SAM Attributes, the rules of the schema are 
> not necessarily the rules that apply to the SAM Attributes see 
> http://blog.joeware.net/2006/01/21/222/ - which is a blog article 
> titled "But the schema says description is multivalued."
>  
> The sAMAccountname is fun because it depends on the object type it is 
> applied to. For instance a user object peaks out at 20 even with LDAP.
>  
> Localgroup names I believe could go to 256 characters if you knew how.

> You can definitely go that high on the local SAM on workstations.
>  
> Even with NET.EXE you can create and manipulate domain local groups 
> with greater than 20 characters. In fact I just doublechecked and 
> easily handled creating, populating, and deleting a group with 100 
> characters. The pinch though is when you are trying to add that group 
> to another group. NET.EXE screws that up and throws the usage screen.
> However, that doesn't mean it can't be done and that the API doesn't 
> handle it. If you grab my LG tool from the website
> (http://www.joeware.net/win/free/tools/lg.htm) it will do it and I can

> guarantee it uses the LEGACY NET API. I wrote the main code used in 
> that tool initially back in about 1997 or 1998 or so.
>  
> I do recall in the early days of W2K some kind of an issue with group 
> names though while importing them into AD from NT4 Domains. If the 
> group was too long it would instead get a random sAMAccountName which 
> I thought was quite fun. I ended up having to put in a check script 
> after every migration to make sure that cn's and SAM Names matched up.
>  
> Interestingly enough, MS has put an attribute into AD to hint at some 
> point upcoming support for turning off the LANMAN support which 
> artifically limits say a userid SAM Name to 20 characters called 
> uASCompat. However, currently that attribute seems to be entirely 
> read-only. I have not been able to find a way to change it the various

> times I have poked through the source code.
>  
>  
>    joe
>  
>  
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Almeida 
> Pinto, Jorge de
> *Sent:* Friday, January 20, 2006 12:14 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Net localgroup limitation?
>
> Hi,
>  
> In AD:
> the sAMAccountName must be between 0 and 256 characters long the cn 
> must be between 1 and 64 characters long
>  
> I guess the NET commands are still using legacy methods
>  
> When creating a group in a NT4 the limit was 20 char when you used the

> user manager for domains. However, using other methods (scripting or 
> third party tooling) it was possible to pass the limit of user manager

> for domains. Don't remember what the real limit was/is
>  
> Jorge
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Freddy HARTONO
> *Sent:* Fri 2006-01-20 08:48
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [ActiveDir] Net localgroup limitation?
>
> Hi
>
> Just curious is there a* 19 characters* limit for net localgroup 
> commands?
>
> Just realised after trying to script a couple of things - that adding 
> this doesn't work
>
> *This works*
> Net localgroup Administrators "domain\12345678910123456789" /ADD
>
> *This doesn't work*
> Net localgroup Administrators "domain\123456789101234567890123456" 
> /ADD
>
> Anyone else comes up with this limitation?
>
> Thank you and have a splendid day!
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Freddy Hartono
> Group Support Engineer
> InternationalSOS Pte Ltd
> mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> phone: (+65) 6330-9785
>
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/


This communication and any documents, files, or previous e-mail messages 
attached to it constitute an electronic communication within the scope of the 
Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 USCA 2510. This communication may 
contain non-public, confidential, or legally privileged information intended 
for the sole use of the designated recipient(s). The unlawful interception, use 
or disclosure of such information is strictly prohibited under 18 USCA 2511 and 
any applicable laws.

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