Windows Server 2003 R2 was designed to be as compatible as possible with
previous versions of the Windows Server operating system. This
compatibility applies to the Active Directory schema that is used by
Windows Server 2003 R2. Unless you are planning to install three
particular new features or to use a computer running
Windows Server 2003 R2 as a domain controller, it is not necessary to
change your current Active Directory schema. However, if you plan to
install any of the three new features or to use a computer running
Windows Server 2003 R2 as a domain controller, you must first prepare
Active Directory by extending the schema to accommodate the needs of
these features. The following features require an extension of the
Active Directory schema:
? Distributed File System (DFS) Replication Service
? Print Management Console
? Identity Management for UNIX
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/7/3/6736027c-35dc-47e2-9543-83e0c1037000/R2SchemaUpdate.doc
Ryan A. Conrad wrote:
Thanks to all...
We've been aware of the ram justifications/limitations, but don't have
a large enough DIT size (nor do we foresee one in the distant future)
alone to justify the memory limitations.
If Susan's post is correct about just having the bits loaded properly
and we establish a potential MIIS integration with a Ent. DC then I'll
toss our ideas out the Window and succumb to the fact that we should
save the co. $$$.
Ryan
On 2/14/06, *Almeida Pinto, Jorge de*
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
yes you could have a mix of DCs where some are std. and some are
ent. AD does not care about that. and if you really wanna go nuts
you could even throw in datacenter edition! ;-)
don't forget what neil said: think about CURRENT and possible
FUTURE requirements
jorge
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on behalf of Ryan A.
Conrad
Sent: Tue 2006-02-14 17:15
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] W2K3 Std. vs. Ent. for DCs
Jorge,
Are you suggesting that some DCs an be Ent. Ed. and some Std.? I
noticed in the matrix that MIIS integration/support was limited to
Ent. Ed., as well as pieces of ADFS. We presently have an empty
root (ignoring why we have it, as I don't want to spark any heated
conversations), with several child domains that we are working on
eliminating. Forest is at 2003 FFL.
Thanks again!
Ryan
On 2/14/06, Almeida Pinto, Jorge de
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
I these are plain vanila DCs standard edition is OK.
However it really depends on what additional features you want to
use on your DCs. Compare the editions of W2K3 and see what you
need for each DC.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/features/comparefeatures.mspx
jorge
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on behalf of Ryan A.
Conrad
Sent: Tue 2006-02-14 16:37
To: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [ActiveDir] W2K3 Std. vs. Ent. for DCs
Dean posted this comment in a recent post:
----------------------------
I have no concerns using Standard edition for DCs, I don't
see it too often since the majority of my customers are licensed
up the wazoo and use whatever ISO they stumble across first :o)
----------------------------
As ironic as it is, we have recently been prodded by our
internal server support group to provide sufficient documentation
(beyond saying "because we want it") as to why we need W2K3 Ent.
instead of W2K3 Std. Thus far the only thing official I've been
able to come up with is the fact that we have multiple DFS
roots. They seem to think that the license costs for Ent. being
3x that of Std. doesn't justify implementation.
Can anyone point me to some documentation or specific
reasons to stick with Ent.? Ultimately this is what we want for
AD, but somehow our desires are not good enough when it comes to
$$$ savings.
Thanks!
Ryan
This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the
intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material,
confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It
should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other
party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly
delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform
the sender. Thank you.
--
Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days?
http://www.threatcode.com
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/
