Rick, thanks your time on this issue.

my view is that we failing at the installation of the agent - as i read it
this takes place using the credentials of the logged in user at the ADMT
console ??

GT


----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Kingslan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 2:05 PM
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] admt 2.0 - nt4 computer migration


> Graham -
>
> I have no documentation of an 'allowedrunlist' policy or setting in NT 4.0
> (not saying that it doesn't exist - just in the limited time I have this
AM
> I can't find anything).  But, given that it does exist, yes - that's what
> I'm saying.  If the policy does truly enforce WHO can run WHAT - then this
> could be an issue.
>
> With that being said - this agent (ADMT), in my experience, runs at the
> LocalSystem context, and therefore should not be subject to the rules of a
> ruleset applied by system policy, AFAIK.
>
> 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 Graham Turner
> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 5:20 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] admt 2.0 - nt4 computer migration
>
> Rick, thanks for post reply.
>
> is your inference then that it is conceivable that a restrictive
> allowedrunlist "tattooed" into the registry is able to prevent whatever
> application it is to run on the NT4 workstation. ???
>
> GT
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick Kingslan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 1:13 AM
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] admt 2.0 - nt4 computer migration
>
>
> > Graham,
> >
> > System Policy on NT 4.0 is truly tatooed to the system.  If you turn
> > it
> off
> > and back on, it's still there - unless manually removed or the policy
> > is backed out via the de-application of said policy.
> >
> > And, sadly - I can't tell you right now what needs to run (yes the
> > Agent, damn it - but what IS the Agent?)....
> >
> > 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 Graham Turner
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 4:25 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] admt 2.0 - nt4 computer migration
> >
> > but then thinking about it no - when i failed on the first nt4 host
> thought
> > it was down to that computer so tried another one straight away - same
> > access denied result
> >
> > have spoken with the developers of the nt4 build  - there is a system
> policy
> > with an allowedrunlist policy - that was that even while logged off
> > this registry value is tattooed into the computer registry ????
> >
> > if this is possible which i must confess to not being sure on then
> > need to work out what actually needs to be allowed to run for the admt
> > dispatch agent to execute
> >
> > clutching at straws a bit !!!
> >
> > GT
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Wilkinson, Stephen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 2:01 PM
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] admt 2.0 - nt4 computer migration
> >
> >
> > > I think Larry's first response could be it Graham.
> > >
> > > We saw exactly this in our testing with the Quest Migrator product.
> > > You must make sure there is no computer account with the same name
> > > already in the AD -  hiding in an OU you least expect it! (ours got
> > > there during testing by manually moving test boxes in and out of the
> > > ad domain and forgetting to remove the computer accounts.
> > >
> > >
> > > Stephen Wilkinson
> > >
> > > Tel     +44(0)207 4759276
> > > Mobile      +44(0)7973 143970
> > > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Duncan, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: 08 July 2003 21:45
> > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > >
> > > Has the "Everyone" group been added to the "Pre-Windows 2000
> > > Compatible Access" group in the new domain?
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Graham Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 3:24 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: [ActiveDir] admt 2.0 - nt4 computer migration
> > >
> > > Am attempting the migration of computer from NT4 source domain to
> > > Windows 2000 target domain.
> > >
> > > the migration environment is working fine with windows 2000
> > > professional clients
> > >
> > > have got issues with the migration of an NT4 workstation
> > >
> > > the extract from dispatch.log on the admt server is attached from
> > > which i
> > am
> > > hoping to get a few clues as to the "access denied"
> > >
> > > have checked the "obvious" issues such as sourcedom\domain admins
> > > being a member of the local administrators group and the computer
> > > migration being run while logged an as a member of that
> > > sourcedom\domain admins group
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > GT
> > >
> > > 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/
> > >
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > -- If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our
> > > e-mail disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to
> > > http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender.
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > --
> > >
> > > 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/
>
> 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/

Reply via email to