Not 100% true as raising the forest functional level traditionally added 
attributes to the partial attribute set which is technically a schema change. 
Whether or not this will still happen when you go to 2008 FFL depends on what 
FFL you're at now.

Thanks,
Brian Desmond
[email protected]

c – 312.731.3132


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:04 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's... (revisited)
> 
> Adprep adds the schema changes.
> 
> None of the new features are activated until the DFL or FFL is increased.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Michael B. Smith
> Consultant and Exchange MVP
> http://TheEssentialExchange.com
> 
> From: Palmer, Neal [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 7:53 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's... (revisited)
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> (Apologies for the long unwieldy sentences!) (D/FL = Domain/Forest
> Functional Level)
> 
> I just wondered if anyone can confirm that the AD DS updates/Schema
> changes and features are all performed during the Adprep before you
> install/add the first W2K8 DC to a domain… and not when you move to D/FL
> W2K8?
> 
> It seems I can’t find information that specifies which new features of W2K8
> are added to AD/Schema during the process of joining to the domain as a DC,
> and what is added later once you’ve W2K8’d all your DC’s and decide to
> move to W2K8 D/FL.
> 
> If there are 3 stages :-
> 
> 1. ADPrep the domain for W2K8
> 2. Install/join a W2K8 DC
> 3. Up the functional/domain level
> 
> I’m a little unsure of what is or isn’t available at each stage.
> 
> We have a W2K3 DL and all W2K3 DC’s. I’m just researching before
> presenting info/requirements to start moving to W2K8. First stage is to get
> one W2K8 DC in…
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Neal
> 
> 
> 
> From: Brian Desmond [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 27 January 2010 06:16
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> The particular issue Bob noted is one of those obscure things that’s unlikely
> to affect most people so I wouldn’t generally worry about it much just FYI…
> 
> Thanks,
> Brian Desmond
> [email protected]
> 
> c - 312.731.3132
> 
> From: Palmer, Neal [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 5:05 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> Hi from a lurker ☺
> 
> Can I just thank you guys for this heads and your post Bob… Im tasked with
> investigating a 2003>2008 domain raise this year and this is an awesome
> starting point!
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Neal
> 
> __________________________________________________________
> _
> 
> Neal Palmer Senior Technical Support Officer UWIC, Cardiff, Wales…
> __________________________________________________________
> _
> 
> From: Brian Desmond [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 09 January 2010 02:55
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> It changes because of the new crypto types IIRC and needing to have a hash
> in that new format.
> 
> Thanks,
> Brian Desmond
> [email protected]
> 
> c – 312.731.3132
> 
> From: Free, Bob [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 6:27 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> Michael- I’m probably further in your debt than the other way around ☺
> 
> One thing this conversation did stir up in my addled old brain that is 
> actually
> germane to the “what happens when I flip the bit” question is that when you
> switch DFL your krbTGT account has  it’s password changed.
> 
> I remember Brial Puhl talking about when they flipped the REDMOND
> domain to Server 2008 DFL, they experienced an issue with some of their
> application servers suddenly failing to authenticate because of the password
> change. They tried to repro it and I don’t think they ever did.   Something to
> keep in the back of your mind.
> 
>  My bet is it changes twice like is recommended in the AD DR WP or the
> joeware “what to do if one of your DCs get’s stolen” instructions. I’d guess 
> it
> is baked in as they actually have an event in 2K8 telling you to change it 
> twice
> if you have to change it for some reason.  Looking at replication metadata for
> pwdLastSet bears that out. I’m not clear on why it needs to be changed
> when raising FL but there must be a good reason.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> --bob
> 
> 
> 
> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 3:35 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> Thanks Bob!
> 
> Let me buy you one (or a few) at TEC…
> 
> From: Free, Bob [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 6:22 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> > I haven’t seen anything documented about raising the DFL/FFL causing
> > security changes.
> 
> It’s that first DC that I’m concerned with, raising FLs comes later in the 
> game.
> 
> There are a few changes that can be made when you introduce the first 2K8
> DC into the domain if they are not specifically configured in your DC policy
> that could affect functionality. There are also some tighter settings that are
> now baked in that could possibly need to be relaxed. To mitigate them, it
> may even be necessary to edit the DC policies from an up-level client prior to
> introducing the first 2K8 DC as the settings required aren’t available to the
> 2K3 editor..
> 
> For example, if you had left LMCompatibility level at the default of 2 but not
> configured it in your GPO, it would be raised to 3 across the domain.  Null
> session shares are cleared from the DC’s registry if not defined in GPO,
> NullSessionPipes list is shorter. There are some NTLM changes
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd566199(WS.10).aspx
> There is the NT4 Crypto issue previously mentioned.   Etc. etc.
> 
> DES is turned off in R2/WIN7 and can affect some apps that only use DES for
> Kerberos encryption, SAP and some JAVA implementations been mentioned
> as possible issues. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/977321
> 
> The list goes on. There are 2 sources I’d recommend reviewing before
> plunking in the first DC.
> 
> Glen LeCheminant’s blog
> http://blogs.technet.com/glennl/archive/2009/08/21/w2k3-to-w2k8-active-
> directory-upgrade-considerations.aspx
> 
> We had the luxury of having Glen come on site and help with our review and
> he pointed us to this resource that Product Services is maintaining on
> TechNet--
> 
> Microsoft Support Quick Start for Adding Windows Server 2008 or Windows
> Server 2008 R2 Domain Controllers to Existing Domains.
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee522994(WS.10).aspx
> 
> Especially look at “known issues” This document is dynamic so I would check
> back occasionally.
> 
> These may all be uneventful in most environments but I’m not going to break
> something like SAP AuthN / AuthZ or some critical app that runs on some
> long forgotten NAS box if I can help it. I’m getting too old for a RGE ☺
> 
> --bob
> 
> 
> From: Michael Waltonen [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 6:29 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> I haven’t seen anything documented about raising the DFL/FFL causing
> security changes.  Do you have anything about this that you can share?
> 
> I have seen the 2008 DCs removed some crypto options from netlogon, but
> there’s a GPO setting to add the support back.
> 
> -Mike
> 
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Michael B. Smith
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:51 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> It removes a number of “obsolete” security options.
> 
> I quote the word “obsolete” because some older/insecure products depend
> on them. Older versions of SAMBA for example. Some NAS that based on
> older versions of SAMBA, etc.
> 
> I ran into a product at one customer called a “CAS” that allowed a single 
> sign-
> on to Apache/IIS/and Windows by actually doing a man-in-the-middle attack!
> It depended on this too.
> 
> From: David Lum [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 1:36 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> From what I’ve read changing the functional level to 2008 doesn’t really “do”
> anything I particular anyway, right?
> 
> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 9:09 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> You have to run the schema upgrade, but nothing says that you ever have to
> bump the domain functional level or the forest functional level.
> 
> I’ve done this for a number of customers, with no ill effect.
> 
> I’d recommend you roll out 2008 or 2008 R2. It’ll save you work in the future.
> 
> From: David Lum [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:00 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Adding 2008 DC's...
> 
> We have an environment with five 2003 Server DC’s. I need to roll out two
> new DC’s and would like to make them 2008 Server. Do you guys consider
> this a major or minor infrastructure change? I’m on the fence – existing DC’s
> are untouched save for running ADPREP on the schema master, otherwise
> the  existing DC’s are untouched. Lots of new features though and to me just
> as importantly 2008 will be supported for years to come.
> 
> My fellow SE’s are telling me to just roll out 2003 and call it good, but to 
> me it
> seems silly since our DC’s typically hang around a long time (6+ years
> currently), and in 5 years security patches go away for 2003 (extended
> support ends 7/2015, and mainstream support ends 7/2010).
> 
> Comments?
> David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
> NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
> (Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
> <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

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

Reply via email to