In this case, they run a license server for a (non-MS) app. I am trying to get that off of the file servers, but for moment it stays. In general though, they will not be getting on the FS at all.
-- nme > -----Original Message----- > From: Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 5:53 PM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Virtual Servers in Branch Offices > > <stupid question alert> > > Why do some users have admin access to the file server? > > Sincerely...one Admin SBSer. > > Tony Murray wrote: > > > Here's a link to a Microsoft document that covers what you > need to do > > to run a production DC on Virtual Server 2005. > > > > *http://tinyurl.com/5enjd* > > ** > > *Tony* > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of > *Noah Eiger > > *Sent:* Thursday, 13 October 2005 11:30 a.m. > > *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > *Subject:* [ActiveDir] Virtual Servers in Branch Offices > > > > Hi - > > > > Just to follow up on the design thread.... Since I am > placing DCs in > > small branch offices is there a value in using Virtual > Server 2005 to > > create separate virtual boxes (DC & file server) running on > the same > > physical box? Some users have administrative access to the file > > server, and I'd love to keep them off the DCs. I am also > curious about > > optimal physical and virtual drive configurations for such a box. > > > > I reviewed the thread here about Virtual Domain Controllers but it > > seemed to focus on using them as backups. I am talking > about production. > > > > Any thoughts most welcome. > > > > -- nme > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > > *This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. > > If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read > it - please > > contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use > any part of > > this communication or disclose anything about it. > > Thank You. * > > > > * > > Please note that this communication does not designate an > information > > system for the purposes of the NZ Electronic Transactions > Act 2002.*. > > > > This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and > > cleared by *NetIQ MailMarshal* at *Gen-i* > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > -- > 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/
