Rick Kingslan MCSE, MCSA, MCT
Microsoft MVP - Active
Directory
Associate Expert
Expert Zone -
www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Friese, Casey
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 11:01 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Thanks Rick,This is my thought as well. If the powers that be refuse to up the bandwidth on the WAN line, is there a problem with relocating the master in Office A to Office B with the other DC?-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Kingslan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 9:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD Design GuidanceGiven that you only have a 256kb connection between sites and DCs, and where the FSMO roles are located, I'd back down your replication times. It seems apparent that much of your problem is due to over utilization of the WAN segment, and the frequency of replication is only going to exacerbate the problem.
As a test, I'd back off the replication times to 60 minutes. Give it 48 hours, and see if the problems at least subside, though I doubt they will be completely solved.
I suspect you're going to be looking at upping the bandwidth on the WAN line. The only way to truly know how large is to run some baselines and find the highwater mark - then plan well above that for the upgrade.
Rick Kingslan MCSE, MCSA, MCT
Microsoft MVP - Active Directory
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Friese, Casey
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 7:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Back on the ball:
>
> My sites and services are setup correctly according to my
> untrained eye.
>
> Tow separate, distinct sites, Office A & Office B. Each
> container has it's respective server listed.
>
> The NTDS Settings For Office A are set as follows:
>
> Name = <automatically generated>
> >From Server = PA-FILE-02
> >From Site = Office B
> Type = Connection
> Trasnport = IP
> Schedule = 4 times per hour
>
>
> The NTDS Settings For Office B are set as follows:
>
> Name = <automatically generated>
> >From Server = PA-FILE-01
> >From Site = Office A
> Type = Connection
> Trasnport = IP
> Schedule = 4 times per hour
>
> I have an Office A to Office B Site Link listed on Inter-Site
> Transports\IP Cost = 100, Replicate every 15 minutes
>
> Spearate Subnets for each site:
> Office A = 10.64.0.0/16
> Office B = 10.128.0.0/16
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 2:18 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD Design Guidance
>
>
> I see nothing absolutely wrong at first blush. I think you
> are confusing domain structure and site structure.
>
> You left some important parts out:
>
> 1. Are the two offices set up as two different AD sites? (I
> suspect not from your problem description).
> 2. Is each of the DCs a GC as well?
>
> A couple of notes:
>
> 1. Exchange can be painful over 256k.
> 2. You really shouldn't be using your DCs as file/print servers.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friese, Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 2:00 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [ActiveDir] AD Design Guidance
>
>
> I have uncovered what I believe is a problem with our Active Directory
> design. I'm looking for assurance that it is indeed a problem judging
> from the symptoms that I am seeing and I'm also looking for
> recommendations on how to correct it.
>
> I've walked into the company just weeks after a consultant started
> implementing the AD design. Now, 8 months later and 10
> servers later I
> believe that the design is flawed. Here are my symptoms:
>
> Any administration activity done on the servers such as setting
> permissions/re-writing permissions, opening property sheets within
> Exchange System Manager, Viewing properties sheets of OU objects/group
> policies, etc. All of these tasks take a long period of time to
> complete or display.
>
> >From the client end we see hanging connections - one moment
> a share is
> >available, the next permission is denied or the connection can't be
> >made. Opening files from the network sluggish and at times dhcp
> >settings are lost.
>
> We have 2 offices:
> Our HQ is in office A
> Our Datacenter is in office B
>
> Office A has 1 Windows 2000 Server and was the first server
> built in the
> Forest. This server is doing File/Print, DHCP, WINS, DNS for it's
> location among doing it's specialized tasks for the domain.
>
> Office B has 9 Windows 2000 Servers - among those 9 is a DC,
> 1 is an E2K
> server and 1 is an ISA server. The DC provides file/print,
> DHCP, WINS,
> DNS for it's location. The E2K server is the mail server for both
> locations and the ISA server is the Firewall for both locations.
>
> Office A is connected to Office B via 256kbps Split T1 used for both
> voice and data. Office B is connected to the internet via
> full T1 which
> is responsible for handling all internet requests.
>
> Both sites, office A and B, belong to the same parent domain -
> company.com with each client's dns set as clientname.company.com
>
> First questions: Are there any flaws with the above design? The most
> noticeable thing to me is that Office A and B communicate of a 256kbps
> shared line. I'm not an expert with AD, in fact, It's new to me but
> from what I understand anything done in Office B has to go to the Head
> Server in Office A. These is where I believe my problems lie.
>
> What I would like to do is break these two sites apart and have
> officeA.company.com and officeB.company.com - I think this is the
> correct approach but I'm not sure. My main concern is our
> Exchange 2000
> Server and out ISA server because they're both linked heavily into the
> AD so totally redoing the design is a bit tough.
> Alternatively, I have
> started entertaining the idea of moving the server in Office A to the
> Office B location making Office B the root domain and any new sites
> child domains.
>
> I apologize for the length and if I've confused anyone - I'm confused
> myself. I just want to know if I'm blaming the symptoms on the right
> thing and how I should proceed.
>
> Thanks,
> Casey
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
>
