I really don't agree in the confined scenario Ulf described. Can you explain your point further or is it merely an issue of Microsoft supporting it?
-- Dean Wells MSEtechnology * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://msetechnology.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tomasz Onyszko Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 5:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Schema Extension Ulf B. Simon-Weidner wrote: > Hi David, > > OK - as far as controlling the update of the schema I'd do it that way: > > Do you really care - aka not frequently tested combination of schema > extensions: > 1. Put the schema master on a otherwise stale switch/hub (to provide a > link but no connection to the network) 2. Backup Systemstate (to file > would be fine) 3. Run the Schema Extensions 4. Verify Schema > Extensions 5. If error in 4, restore systemstate 6. Plug back into the > production network Ulf ... I don't think that restoring the system state in the case of schema extension failure is a proper thing. I would suggest instead of that decommission of this DC and seizing Schema FSMO to other DC in the forest. -- Tomasz Onyszko http://www.w2k.pl/blog/ - (PL) http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/tomek/ - (EN) 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/
