Who said you could talk? :)
Honestly, my position on all this is very simple. I was a tech and
have been
hacking solutions a long time before I became an MVP. I will always be a
techie first.
It is MS' responsibility to enforce its EULA, and they have enough
resources
to do just that. IF I make a categorical statement to a client that
something
could NOT be done, and the client finds out that it can (but should
not) be
done, I lose credibility. Whatever I tell them from then on will be
taken
with reservations. I am a tech first, then an MVP.
I respect EULA, but the techie in me is more interested in toying with
things. There have been many, many instances when MS has told us that
things
couldn't be done, where we techies have gone out to do it, and where
MS has
ended up backtracking and incorporating the product of our curiosity
into the
mainstream. We chalked it all down to product feedback and
improvement. "F6"
to load in unsupported drivers was considered an unsupported hack
back in 96
or so. HAL switching in system image was (is?) considered a hack and
unsupported. I can't tell you how many ways we had to hack SBS 4.0
back in 97
just so things can work on, say, a system that had no modem. Many of the
things we did went into SBS4.5, although many of them were previously
"unsupported".
Things can be done - it all depends on your patience, persistence and
resourcefulness. Kids have been putting fingers in the fire for a
long time -
and kids will continue to do so till eternity - regardless of how often
people warn them about the danger.
The information is publicly out there (with sufficient caveats about
EULA
violations, supportability issues, and burning toasters) and, in my very
humble opinion, if MS really doesn't want to see this done, they have
access
to the source code and have had plenty of time to kill the hack
(QFEs, SPs,
killbits, whatever) such that the process can not even be attempted. Or
better still, maybe they can put a fix in so that the hack does not
cause
havocs.
I'm done as far as this topic is concerned now.
Sincerely,
Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Roger Seielstad
Sent: Wed 9/14/2005 5:29 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] SBS Server Question
Yeah, but his MVP is in MSDS (as in Dining Services). We've got
pictures to
prove it
--------
Roger Seielstad
E-mail Geek
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan
Bradley, CPA
aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 12:52 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] SBS Server Question
EULA dear.
There's Can and there is legal.
No you can't and be legal... and for a MVP shame on you ;-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, depending on your level of tolerance for pains, I know that
you can.
http://www.akomolafe.com/Portals/1/Creating%20a%20trust%20relationship%
20betw een%20two%20Small%20Business%20Server%202000%20domains.htm
Sincerely,
Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Sakari Kouti
Sent: Wed 9/14/2005 11:46 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] SBS Server Question
Hi Jose,
No, an SBS domain cannot have trusts, so it cannot be a child domain.
And yes, after you have installed an SBS box, you can install
additional DCs, if they are normal Windows Server 2003 boxes.
Yours, Sakari
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Medeiros,
Jose
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:47 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] SBS Server Question
Hi Susan,
Since we have an SBS MVP on the Active Dir list, let me ask a
question.
Can I now make an SBS 2003 server a child domain in an AD
2003 forest?
Before you ask why, some one asked me this recently at a Linux users
group meeting, as his company has several remote offices using SBS
2003.
Also on SBS 4.5, one could have a BDC as a backup, can this also be
done with a DC or are you " Sh.T out of luck " when a box fails?
Jose
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
--
Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days?
http://www.threatcode.com
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
