Assuming you're not talking about GPOs but AD design in general: Sort of. (You may want to invest in some reading materials; if you keep the strict definitions of those objects in mind, their place in the hierarchy becomes real clear).
A forest by definition is a grouping of trees with discontinuous namespaces (microsoft.com and msn.com might be part of the same forest). A tree is a group of domains with the same namespace (development.microsoft.com and finance.microsoft.com) Within a domain, you can have several OUs. The above items are logical in nature. Sites are physical, and as such do not really get put in the hierarchy. A domain can be spread out among several sites, and a site can contain objects from multiple domains/trees/forests. Clear as mud? > -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Esgro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 10:47 AM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: New to Active Directory > > > Is this the proper hierarchy of an AD structure? > > Forests > Domains > Sites > OU > > Am I missing anything? > > ------ > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ------ You are subscribed as [email protected] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
