Hey Deji, slap a smiley face on that post or a disclaimer about sarcasm and email not mixing like beer and liquor or something that. :o) I am confused by the app partition making it possible to do GC-less remote sites... I could take that a couple of ways but app partitions wouldn't have anything to do with either. A GC-less site is simply a site without a GC, the machines that need a GC would still be able to find one, just wouldn't be local. Check out your _gc._tcp.<SITE>._sites.rootdomain.com SRV record, that will show you what GC(s) will be used for any given site. If a site doesn't have a GC in it, auto site coverage will kick in and some other DC based on link metrics and the phase of the moon (humor!!) will determine what DC publishes to that record. The other way to take that would be the GC-less logon capability that W2K3 has added. That also doesn't rely on app partitions. It adds an attribute or two to a user object for maintaining some cache info about GC info. Basically you can go with out GC's in a site if you don't have universal groups you are using (especially to deny) and you aren't using UPN's. On W2K we actually now only run about 30 GC's out of our 380 or so DC's and have enabled the IgnoreGCFailures reg hack because we are lucky like that and can get away with it. Finally app partitions aren't replicated to every DC in a domain. You select where you want to replicate that info to, otherwise there would be no point in it, might as well just throw the data into the config or domain partitions. joe
-----Original Message----- From: deji Agba [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 4:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Quick AD integrated DNS question :) Yes, you did indeed miss it. So, go find it. Yourself, this time with no help. Hint: Application partition is the new partion in E2K3 which, in addtion to The Domain, Configuration and Schema Partitions now make up the AD database in E2K3. It is this change that makes it possible now to deploy GC-less Remote Sites. The Application Partition is SHARED(replicated) to ALL DCs in the Domain, including designated DCs in the Forest. Sincerely, Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE MCSA MCP+I www.akomolafe.com www.iyaburo.com Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Rogers, Brian Sent: Mon 7/14/2003 11:53 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Quick AD integrated DNS question :) Woahhhhh....I musta missed that document. AD integrated DNS can now be separated from regular replication? Gotta link? Book? Paper? Smokesignal? Morse? :-) -----Original Message----- From: Rick Kingslan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 1:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Quick AD integrated DNS question :) This would be correct. But, remember that in the replication strategy for Win2k - data goes to every DC regardless if it's a DNS server or not - because once it's DNS-integrated, it's now a part of the AD data. This trend is broken in Win2k3, where application partitions can handle DNS - and do. The DomainDNS and ForestDNS are just that, for all intents and purposes. They are AD Application parts handling DNS for just DNS servers - and no DNS data need be on the DCs, unless it too, is a DNS server once the full DNS app partition is configured. 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 Rogers, Brian Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 10:10 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Quick AD integrated DNS question :) I was looking more along the lines of replication traffic. However since the zone is replicated within AD....there shouldn't be any additional (or if so very minimal) replication traffic between the DNS servers other than the normal AD replication traffic correct? -----Original Message----- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 10:58 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Quick AD integrated DNS question :) I always configure every DC as a DNS server. I consider that if a location requires a DC, it also requires local DNS. -------------------------------------------------------------- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Rogers, Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 10:39 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: [ActiveDir] Quick AD integrated DNS question :) 1. When configuring an AD Integrated DNS zone, at least one DC in each site should be running DNS? Or all DCs should be running DNS? Would it matter either way?
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
