RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-30 Thread Roger Seielstad
[mailto:MTucker;aelita.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 4:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC Gil, you are correct. I think Roger is confusing not having a the client's subnet defined in AD with auto-site coverage. If the client's subnet is not defined in AD

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-30 Thread Gil Kirkpatrick
. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Gil Kirkpatrick [mailto:gilk;netpro.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 2:11 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC But NETLOGON does

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-29 Thread Roger Seielstad
, Mark [mailto:MTucker;aelita.com] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 3:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC I would agree that you want to register the subnets in Sites and Services. If a client attempts to authenticate from a subnet

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-29 Thread Gil Kirkpatrick
] Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 7:43 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC If you decide to create an empty site (no DCs)for you subnets, the autosite coverage algorithm will ensure that clients in that site are authenticated with a DC in a nearby site

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-29 Thread Roger Seielstad
. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Gil Kirkpatrick [mailto:gilk;netpro.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 12:27 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC Really

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-29 Thread Gil Kirkpatrick
[mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 11:19 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC Site coverage works exactly as Stuart Kwan explained - without manual intervention of the RR records, the actual logins are processed fairly randomly - they don't

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-29 Thread Tucker, Mark
/29/2002 1:10 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Cc: Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC But NETLOGON does create SRV recs to cover DC-less sites if there are sites and subnets defined, which is what the original post indicated

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-25 Thread Fugleberg, David A
-Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 7:39 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC Oh, and this all does assume that YOUR network engineers TELL you when they put in a whole 'nother group

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-24 Thread Roger Seielstad
You need to create a subnet, but not a discrete site. We tend to run a hub and spoke WAN layout - a small number of larger offices, each with a full infrastructure, all interconnected. The smaller offices are spoked off one of the larger offices. In the case of small offices without domain

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-24 Thread Roger Seielstad
- MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Garello, Kenneth [mailto:KGarello;worcester.edu] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 5:07 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC How much

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-24 Thread Rick Kingslan
;mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:59 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC From experience, I wouldn't trust the locator to get 'close' very often. During our initial deployment, the WAN team changed the IP pools

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-24 Thread Roger Seielstad
. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Rick Kingslan [mailto:rkingsla;cox.net] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 9:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-24 Thread Tucker, Mark
in the closest site based on cost will register site-specific SRV records for the empty site. -Mark -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 9:39 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC Oh

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-24 Thread Gil Kirkpatrick
Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 4:59 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC From experience, I wouldn't trust the locator to get 'close' very often. During our initial deployment, the WAN team

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-24 Thread Gil Kirkpatrick
Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 7:39 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC Oh, and this all does assume that YOUR network engineers TELL you when they put in a whole 'nother group of networks

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-23 Thread Gil Kirkpatrick
Title: Message Hey Don, Is this your first post to the list? If so, welcome. To answer your question, no you don't have to create a site for each subnet. You can associate multiple subnets with a single site. Or you can leavethe subnets unassigned, and the DC locator will do its best to

RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC

2002-10-23 Thread Garello, Kenneth
Title: Message How much overhead does leaving it up to the locator incur? Ken -Original Message- From: Gil Kirkpatrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 4:37 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sites with no DC Hey Don