> Maybe I can help w/ the ego (after all I consider trimming Dean's ego > one of my higher callings in life ;-) ... Remain focused on your own for now. Once you no longer feel the need to wear t-shirts with your own face on them, you can probably rest assured that you're safe to begin on mine ;0)
... uhhh, okey dokes :0/ -- Dean Wells MSEtechnology t Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://msetechnology.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:ActiveDir- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brett Shirley > Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 9:12 AM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Cc: Send - AD mailing list > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir][OT]Dean's kick-a## article > > Maybe I can help w/ the ego (after all I consider trimming Dean's ego > one of my higher callings in life ;-) ... > > Dean, you said you didn't mind if we continued to discuss this thread > at one point (a at the time highly volatile thread, which I decided to > let settle down), do you remember this thread: > > http://www.mail- > archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/msg32470.html > > Where I think you basically conveyed (IMNHO) I didn't know what I was > talking about in regards to what is required for a DS implementation > ... > > >From your two emails in that thread, first you said: > > > ... that the process of injecting the phantom isn't a behavioral > > requirement imposed or carried out by the directory service itself. > > It is a requirement imposed by the underlying database and is > > necessary because of the mechanism used by ESE to provide uniform > > representation of object references (i.e. link pairs). > > Then in a subsequent email: > > > Nod, I understand your point but, to me, it's a matter of perspective > > -- where does the directory begin and end? From a developers > > standpoint, the directory may well be a whole component neatly > > organized into a single area of a source tree. From my perspective, > > the term directory (in this context) is used to relay the concept of > a > > (mostly) standards based component with predictable features, > > interfaces, behaviors, structures, underlying mechanisms, etc. > > Any directory service has a form of the infrastructure master DN- > cleanup problem, when the "cross-reference" spans replication scopes, > irregardless of underlying database technology, ESE, or SQL Server, or > anything else you can think of. If they seemingly don't have this > problem, then there is some form of replication happening and thus the > DN isn't really crossing replication scopes (that's why the GC doesn't > have this problem ... as you pointed out in part 1 of the article). > > So I'd argue the last 2 lines in the first quote were wrong in two > ways: > (A) ESE doesn't provide uniform representation of object references. > That's just patently incorrect. And (B) this isn't an ESE > implementation detail, it is a DS implementation detail for being > constructed on any kind of database that isn't performing replication > (same as SQL, MySQL, BerkleyDB, whatever NDS used, or ESE)? I just > want it on record ... > 8/17/2005, Dean was wrong once. > > Thanks, > BrettSh > ex-Garage Door Operator #7. > > > On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Dean Wells wrote: > > > Cheeky git . my head, your stomach . at least we'll have the plane to > > ourselves! :0) > > > > > > > > Best start working on that pilot's license! > > > > -- > > Dean Wells > > MSEtechnology > > * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://msetechnology.com <http://msetechnology.com/> > > > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe > > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 5:09 PM > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir][OT]Dean's kick-a## article > > > > > > > > Hey I sometimes have to ride on planes with that guy, don't swell his > ego > > too much... I want to be able to sit on the plane. > > > > > > > > :) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matheesha > > Weerasinghe > > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 3:02 PM > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] > > > > joe said "pretty decent" http://blog.joeware.net/2006/06/08/400/ > > > > > > > > I think thats an understatement ;-) > > > > > > > > However, my profuse thanks to joe too. I wasnt aware of the article > until he > > blogged it. > > > > > > > > M@ > > > > > > > > On 8/14/06, Dean Wells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Why thank you . but who said otherwise? ;0) > > > > -- > > Dean Wells > > MSE technology > > * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://msetechnology.com <http://msetechnology.com/> > > > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matheesha > > Weerasinghe > > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 2:35 PM > > > > > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > > > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] > > > > > > > > > http://searchwinit.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid1_gci1192 > 821,0 > > 0.html?track=NL-463 > > > <http://searchwinit.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid1_gci119 > 2821, > > 00.html?track=NL-463&ad=554811USCA&ad=554808> > &ad=554811USCA&ad=554808 > > > > > > > > I dont care what anyone says. Thats a damn fine article. > > > > > > > > I couldnt possibly thank Dean enough for that info. > > > > M@ > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8/14/06, Graham Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Alter ego ! > > > > my thanks are due > > > > worked out a treat - so the GC's are not so ***'d as i thought > > > > any info on the concept of the phantoms though ?? > > > > GT > > > > > Hey Robert, > > > > > > In the article you posted, the registry key is incorrect in the KB > > > content. It lists the registry key as: > > > HKCU\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\Directory > > > > > > However, the correct registry key is: > > > HKCU\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\Directory UI > > > > > > I've sent a comment to my former employer to ask for them to fix > the > > > article...next time, test it *before* you post! > > > > > > Your Alter Ego, > > > Robert Williams > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Williams, > > > Robert > > > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 9:28 AM > > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] > > > > > > Hey Graham, > > > > > > This may not be what you're experiencing, but it could be worth it > to > > > check to see how many members you have in the group(s) in question. > By > > > default, if the group has over 500 members in it, the user icons > inside > > > the group will turn grey. Check out this article for more > information: > > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q281923/ > > > > > > Let us know if that turned out to be the cause. > > > > > > Have a great day! > > > > > > Robert Williams > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Graham Turner > > > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 9:01 AM > > > To: activedir@mail.activedir.org > > > Subject: [ActiveDir] > > > > > > Dear all, am experiencing issues that i think attributable to the > > > concept of Active > > > Directory phantoms > > > > > > the symptom is that when we open certain global groups the > membership > > > list comes out > > > with grey icons > > > > > > this is not all groups - affected ones being - Domain Users / > Domain > > > computers > > > > > > must confess to not a full understanding of the issue here -but it > seems > > > this > > > relates in some way to GC lookup ?? > > > > > > i can for sure confirm that the GC port 3268 is open on the GC's > > > > > > not sure why as the group / user members are in the same domain ? > > > > > > after the understanding of what is going on here is, of course 'HOW > DO > > > WE FIX' ?? > > > > > > technet seems to reference a concept of 'phantom clean up task' - a > > > process that > > > runs on the server running 'INFRASTRUCURE MASTER' fsmo role on a > > > scheduled basis to > > > resolve the directory issue. > > > > > > would seem not in this case ? > > > > > > as a point to note, neither netdiag or dcdiag are coming up with > nothing > > > concliusive > > > in this respect. > > > > > > help as always gladly received > > > > > > GT > > > > > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx > > > > > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx > > > > > > > > > > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx
