They are definitely a traffic boundary if you want them to be. This requires a 
lot more planning for it to actually be the case though.

Thanks,
Brian Desmond
[email protected]

c - 312.731.3132

From: David Lum [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 8:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Active Directory design in the win2008 R2 world

+1 Domains are an administration boundary, not a traffic boundary. You will 
have DC's and GC's all over the place but not different domains, and as you 
said, since 2008 allows different password policies you don't even need 
different domains for that.
David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764



From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 5:05 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Active Directory design in the win2008 R2 world

Agreed... 1 domain.

Additional complication requires justification. Ask them to quantify the 
additional traffic load for the expected domain topology and provide traffic 
statistics demonstrating that a single domain environment would be problematic.

-sc

From: Pauls Hotmail [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 6:31 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Active Directory design in the win2008 R2 world

What's the collective wisdom these days regarding the justification of 
deploying multiple domains as a means of limiting replication traffic? I have 
an instance here where every part of me wants to suggest a single forest/domain 
as the optimum solution, but a couple of other admins are pushing for multiple 
domains purely with the justification of controlling AD object replication. The 
AD will be a completely new implementation based on Win 2008 R2, there are 
about 8 countries in scope, but all have extremely good/fast MPLS WAN links 
between them. There are currently only about 1200 users in total, and Exchange 
2010 will be going in as well.

 I'm proposing a single domain, with multiple AD sites, as there's no other 
good reason for over-complicating the design with additional domains, i.e. none 
of the traditional justifications for adding additional domains apply in this 
case.. Plus I believe at least some of the traditional justifications no longer 
apply in W2008 anyway do they? - things like needing domains for the purpose of 
applying differing password policies for example, now that we have the new 
granular password policy ...

Can anyone point me in the direction of some best practice design guidelines 
that would cast some light on these questions? - it's been a few years since I 
was last "properly" involved in AD design, so I'm conscious that things have 
moved on in the AD world, and I probably need to take up-to-date information 
into consideration..

Many thanks.

Paul Gordon













~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to