If you follow the thread's consensus, it is that it's just a bug in
gpresult. I have a forest built from scratch on 2003 that's never seen
hide nor hair of anything w2k and gpresult still reports it as 2000. 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bart Van den
Wyngaert
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 3:07 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003?

Well actually I didn't use the adfind tool yet, when I read the
beginning of this thread I looked in the GUI "Active Directory Domains
and Trust" where is listed that my functional level of domain & forrest
is W2K3 (which I raised some months ago and seems correct).
But when I run the gpresult tool, it states that my domain type is
"Windows 2000", which I find a bit odd. Did I miss something in the
upgrade process or something? Is it an issue?

On 11/16/06, joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> AdFind only determines the Directory level, it doesn't look for 
> functional modes or mixed mode. The way I get directory level is 
> through the supportedCapabilities attribute of the rootdse of the DC. 
> Of course it is possible to hit one DC looking for info and I pull the

> ROOTDSE from that DC and then in the background a referral is 
> processed which ends up getting the info from another DC in another 
> domain (or same domain if looking at app parts).
>
> You can get functionality modes from the rootdse attributes 
> domainFunctionality and forestFunctionality.
>
> For all of those, just do an
>
> AdFind -rootdse
>
> And you will see what I am decoding and logically how I ascertain 
> directory level.
>
>
>
> Mixed mode versus native you simply use the domain NCs nTMixedDomain 
> attribute.
>
>   joe
>
>
> --
> O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - 
> http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Williams
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 11:50 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003?
>
> I don't understand where you are seeing this info.  Are you referring 
> to the
>
> applet that is used to raise the FL?  Or something else?
>
> As for the "flag" that is used to identify the directory, it is 
> usually a combination of:
>
> msDS-Behavior-Version
> nTMixedDomain
> supportedCapabilities
>
>
> Or at least, that is the way I put info. such as server and directory 
> in each of my scripts.  Just like Joe does in ADFIND and ADMOD.  I 
> believe he does it the same way too.
>
> Basically, check msDS-Behavior-Version.  If it's 0, check 
> nTMixedDomain.  If
>
> it's 2, check supportedCapabilities to see whether or not it is ADAM 
> (it's ADAM if one of the supportedCapabilities is 
> 1.2.840.113556.1.4.1851 [LDAP_CAP_ACTIVE_DIRECTORY_ADAM_OID]).
>
> In my test lab(s), my directory is considered a 2003 directory.
>
> In my labs, I used either DOMAIN.MSC or ADMOD to increase the FLs.
>
>
> --Paul
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 3:45 PM
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003?
>
>
> > I've entered this thread late so apologies if the below has already 
> > been
> > stated:
> >
> > I recently created a new dev forest, with multiple domains. I too 
> > raised DFL and FFL as soon as all domains were built.
> >
> > I do not see the issues you describe and would suggest you download 
> > the scripts available here http://www.jadonex.com/
> >
> > One of the scripts (written by Dean) checks the DFL and FFL for the 
> > forest and across all domains.
> >
> > For a manual check, I also look here:
> >
> > FFL
> > ===
> > CN=Partitions,CN=Configuration,DC=xxx
> > Attribute msDS-Behavior-Version
> > 0=w2k FFL, 1=interim FFL, 2=w2k3 FFL
> >
> > DFL
> > ===
> > CN=<domainName>,CN=Partitions,CN=Configuration,DC=xxx
> > Attribute msDS-Behavior-Version
> > 0=w2k DFL, 1=interim DFL, 2=w2k3 DFL
> >
> > Hope that helps,
> > neil
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Onsomu
> > Sent: 16 November 2006 14:35
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003?
> >
> > I got curios about this and decide to dcpromo my vm image of windows
> > 2003 R2.
> >
> > After the AD installation (which sits at Windows 2000 for domain 
> > type) I raised the functionality for the domain and forest.
> >
> > The result for domain type was windows 2000.
> >
> > I am not sure it is supposed to be different.
> >
> > Anybody out there who can say their install says something else?
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan 
> > Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 3:15 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003?
> >
> > Were these clean installs or inplace?
> >
> > Bart Van den Wyngaert wrote:
> >> Well I also have a strange thing... It concerns 2 SBS 2003 systems.
> >> Some months ago I raised both domain and forrest functional level 
> >> on those boxes. By reading this thread I decided to have a look...
> >>
> >> Both tools report the correct OS actually on both boxes.
> >>
> >> The only I wonder is a bit that they both report with the gpresult 
> >> tool that the domain type is Windows 2000....
> >>
> >> If I look using GUI, they both report functional level of domain & 
> >> forest being at 2003.
> >>
> >> Don't really get actually. Is this related? Normal or missed 
> >> something
> >
> >> when I did raise the functional levels?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Bart
> >>
> >> On 11/10/06, Noah Eiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Good question. DFL = 2003 and FFL = 2003. So it must just be some 
> >>> lingering text string. Does anyone think there is more it?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> -- nme
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Clingaman, Bruce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 9:39 AM
> >>> To: [email protected]
> >>> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> What does it say under:  AD Users & Computers | [right click 
> >>> domain name] | Raise Domain Functional Level...
> >>>
> >>> ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Noah 
> >>> Eiger
> >>> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 11:12 AM
> >>> To: [email protected]
> >>> Subject: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003?
> >>>
> >>> Hi -
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Several months ago, I upgraded a small, multi-site domain from W2k

> >>> to
> >
> >>> W2k3. Or so I thought. The various markings in the schema indicate

> >>> that the upgrade was successful. But when I run, for example, 
> >>> gpresult, it reports a Windows 2000 domain. Is this just some flag

> >>> or
> >
> >>> string that did not get set properly or is there really a problem
> > with the upgrade?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -- nme
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> P.S. I also just noticed that when I run netdiag on a new W2k3EN 
> >>> DC, it says "System info: Windows 2000 Server (Build 3790)".
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >>> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.32/523 - Release Date:
> >>> 11/7/2006
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> >>> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> >>> List archive:
> >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> No virus found in this incoming message.
> >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >>> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.32/523 - Release Date:
> >>> 11/7/2006
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >>> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.32/523 - Release Date:
> >>> 11/7/2006
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> >>> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> >>> List archive:
> >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> >>>
> >> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> >> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> >> List archive:
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days?
> > http://www.threatcode.com
> >
> > If you are a SBSer and you don't subscribe to the SBS Blog... man 
> > ... I will hunt you down...
> > http://blogs.technet.com/sbs
> >
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive: 
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> >
> >
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive: 
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> >
> >
> >
> > PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is confidential

> > and intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an 
> > intended recipient of this email please notify the sender 
> > immediately and delete your copy from your system. You must not 
> > copy, distribute or take any further action in reliance on it. Email

> > is not a secure method of communication and Nomura International plc

> > ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by law, accept 
> > responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness of,

> > or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or 
> > disabling code in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If 
> > verification of this email is sought then please request a hard 
> > copy. Unless otherwise stated this email: (1) is not, and should not

> > be treated or relied upon as, investment research; (2) contains 
> > views or opinions that are solely those of the author and do not 
> > necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is intended for 
> > informational purposes only and is not a recommendation, 
> > solicitation or offer to buy or sell securities or related financial

> > instruments.  NIplc does not provide investment services to private 
> > customers.  Authorised and regulated by the Financial Services 
> > Authority.  Registered in England no. 1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35.  
> > Registered Office: 1 St Martin's-le-Grand, London, EC1A 4NP.  A 
> > member of the Nomura group of companies.
> >
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive: 
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>
List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

Reply via email to