I kinda like the idea of running a DC in a VS machine, and having an
online realtime copy of it somewhere in addition to incremental
backups... and you should be able to bring up the vhd on any box, not
just one with similar hardware, and without having to go through Laura's
7 step DR plan :) (reference thread [ActiveDir] AD Restore Problem)
But can you have a VSS-type remote copy of your DC session vhd file?
(Forgive me if I bring up topics that were adequately addressed during
my hiatus in Windows Desktop Deployment World...)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Rich Milburn
MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development
Applebee's International, Inc.
4551 W. 107th St
Overland Park, KS 66207
913-967-2819
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
"I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn
how to do it." - Pablo Picasso
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley,
CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 1:12 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
As a representative of the SBS community there is not a day that goes by
that the 'can we cluster SBS' or 'can I have a hot server' doesn't come
up. [if you have SA you can have a cold server]
With 9/11, with Katrina, with the potential for earthquakes in
California ... honestly... the answer for any small business should not
be 'well hope your backup is good... you have tested it right?'
Conversely I would argue the home user needs to be better protected than
they are now. [but that's way OT] I think the fault tolerance for
small firms is being a bit pushed to the asp/hosted services model in
the marketplace even though us control freaks aren't always fond of
that.
Actually we 'can' have additional domain controllers..just that the SBS
has to hold the FSMO roles and be the PDC. By the time you reconfigure
that additional DC to take over the FSMO roles...maybe your time is
better spent fixing the PDC, ya know?
Is there a good story for small firms to have redundancy, fault
tolerance without a fat checkbook?
Nope, I would argue...not really.....right now imaging is the only way.
And in that instance.. you probably want to stay with a single DC and
not suffer the wrath of Brett and ghosting your DCs.
A recent whitepaper on the subject of the 'myths' of SBS:
http://msmvps.com/bradley/archive/2005/10/04/68986.aspx
http://msmvps.com/bradley/archive/2005/10/05/69035.aspx
I still would argue that virtualization needs to be done WAY more than
we are doing now...but that's just my wacko thoughts.
Rich Milburn wrote:
I think the biggest reason people want to be able to run multiple
domains on one server is the same reason practically no one (except for
SBS) installs just one DC, and the same reason we always install a
minimum of 2 for a domain. We have a forest root and 2 child domains
model, and it takes us 6 servers to run that - for basically 2
directories and fewer than 5000 users. That seems like a waste of
hardware in some situations - especially if you have multiple orgs that
you run. The parallel might be for a web hosting company to have 2
full
web servers for each domain they host - in case 1 goes down, they still
have a second. VS is an answer, yes, although you still need a full
server license for each VM. The thing with domains is you don't want
to
only have 1 online copy of the directory. MS didn't seem too convinced
there was a good reason to have an online second server - they cited
backups as a good solution to the issue. In a big org the cost of an
additional server to provide redundancy is negligible, but is having an
online copy (second DC) really the BEST way to do this? And it doesn't
help SBS users, since they can (correct me if I'm wrong) only have 1
DC.
I realize it may be the best way we have with W2K3, but how could the
issue of redundancy be addressed with AD differently than having 2 DCs
minimum per domain? Anyone have any ideas?
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:20 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
Yeah I can say that it isn't in Longhorn. As the dev guys put it, this
is a
tough one. It wouldn't just be a nobrainer if they had separate
instances of
AD, there are just tons of other things involved that make it extremely
difficult. It was something that was brought up in the summit though,
not
sure how much I can say around it other than no, it won't be there.
MS feels the focus of this is dramatically reduced now as well due to
the
fact that VS is available and can run DCs. Also the Server Core DCs
helps
here as well as the DCs will have a smaller footprint. If folks are NOT
in
agreement with that assessment, definitely speak up, it is too late for
Longhorn but possibly the opportunity exists to convince them for
BlackComb.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charlie Kaiser
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:37 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
I'd also like to see the ability to run DCs for multiple domains on the
same
server. SMBs with limited resources balk at having to buy additional
server
hardware for redundancy on multiple domains, especially when the AD
load
on
the DCs is minimal. This feature sounds like an offshoot of your list
below.
If you can run AD as a service, it might not be that hard to allow
multiple
domains similar to multiple websites/DBs on one server...
I remember discussing this with Stuart Kwan at DEC a couple of years
ago. I
hope it makes it into the mix...
**********************
Charlie Kaiser
W2K3 MCSA/MCSE/Security, CCNA
Systems Engineer
Essex Credit / Brickwalk
510 595 5083
**********************
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 4:25 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
Vista is the client OS. I don't believe they have named Longhorn
Server yet.I am voting for something like Windows Server 5.4.0 or
something like that. I realize that the marketing group would have
something to say about it but I figure the best thing from them is if
they pronounced their thoughts from the bottom of Lake Washington.
People don't install servers because they have cool names.
The biggest non-NDA pieces that I have heard announced in conferences
or seen on the web already is the Read Only DC to limit security
exposure for WAN deployments, restartable AD that can be
stopped/started as necessary, DA/Admin separation so that you can have
an Admin on a DC that "can't" achieve Domain-wide DA level rights, and
DCs running on Server Foundation or now its called Server Core which
is a GUI-challenged Windows Server.
I can also say that there are a myriad of GUI updates for the Admin
tools though I can't state specifics. BJ Whalen who was involved with
the GPMC project has been brought in to work on admin experience and
anyone who has worked with GPOs with and without GPMC know that he
really helped out.
All in all, there is some very cool stuff and MS has really been
listening to the community on what they want and need. I know that
this list is watched for ideas and such and has been the source of
DCRs internally. So if you have ideas, spout them here, they will most
certainly be heard. They may not make Longhorn as it is getting a bit
late to add major changes but your ideas could make it into a later
rev.
joe
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven Wood
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 3:46 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
Hi,
With Windows Vista on it's way what's on people's wish list as far as
Active Directory is concerned? Also are there any big enhancements
due?
Thanks
Steven
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/
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE-------
PRIVILEGED /
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any
attachments.
This information is strictly confidential and may be subject to
attorney-client
privilege. This message is intended only for the use of the named
addressee. If
you are not the intended recipient of this message, unauthorized
forwarding,
printing, copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you
should
kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this
message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal
criminal law.
Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review
the
content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages
sent to
or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's
International, Inc.
e-mail system.
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/
