It's not an issue. Laura
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bart > Van den Wyngaert > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 6:07 PM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003? > > Well actually I didn't use the adfind tool yet, when I read > the beginning of this thread I looked in the GUI "Active > Directory Domains and Trust" where is listed that my > functional level of domain & forrest is W2K3 (which I raised > some months ago and seems correct). > But when I run the gpresult tool, it states that my domain > type is "Windows 2000", which I find a bit odd. Did I miss > something in the upgrade process or something? Is it an issue? > > On 11/16/06, joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > AdFind only determines the Directory level, it doesn't look for > > functional modes or mixed mode. The way I get directory level is > > through the supportedCapabilities attribute of the rootdse > of the DC. > > Of course it is possible to hit one DC looking for info and > I pull the > > ROOTDSE from that DC and then in the background a referral is > > processed which ends up getting the info from another DC in another > > domain (or same domain if looking at app parts). > > > > You can get functionality modes from the rootdse attributes > > domainFunctionality and forestFunctionality. > > > > For all of those, just do an > > > > AdFind -rootdse > > > > And you will see what I am decoding and logically how I ascertain > > directory level. > > > > > > > > Mixed mode versus native you simply use the domain NCs > nTMixedDomain > > attribute. > > > > joe > > > > > > -- > > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Paul Williams > > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 11:50 AM > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003? > > > > I don't understand where you are seeing this info. Are you > referring > > to the > > > > applet that is used to raise the FL? Or something else? > > > > As for the "flag" that is used to identify the directory, it is > > usually a combination of: > > > > msDS-Behavior-Version > > nTMixedDomain > > supportedCapabilities > > > > > > Or at least, that is the way I put info. such as server and > directory > > in each of my scripts. Just like Joe does in ADFIND and ADMOD. I > > believe he does it the same way too. > > > > Basically, check msDS-Behavior-Version. If it's 0, check > > nTMixedDomain. If > > > > it's 2, check supportedCapabilities to see whether or not > it is ADAM > > (it's ADAM if one of the supportedCapabilities is > > 1.2.840.113556.1.4.1851 [LDAP_CAP_ACTIVE_DIRECTORY_ADAM_OID]). > > > > In my test lab(s), my directory is considered a 2003 directory. > > > > In my labs, I used either DOMAIN.MSC or ADMOD to increase the FLs. > > > > > > --Paul > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 3:45 PM > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003? > > > > > > > I've entered this thread late so apologies if the below > has already > > > been > > > stated: > > > > > > I recently created a new dev forest, with multiple domains. I too > > > raised DFL and FFL as soon as all domains were built. > > > > > > I do not see the issues you describe and would suggest > you download > > > the scripts available here http://www.jadonex.com/ > > > > > > One of the scripts (written by Dean) checks the DFL and > FFL for the > > > forest and across all domains. > > > > > > For a manual check, I also look here: > > > > > > FFL > > > === > > > CN=Partitions,CN=Configuration,DC=xxx > > > Attribute msDS-Behavior-Version > > > 0=w2k FFL, 1=interim FFL, 2=w2k3 FFL > > > > > > DFL > > > === > > > CN=<domainName>,CN=Partitions,CN=Configuration,DC=xxx > > > Attribute msDS-Behavior-Version > > > 0=w2k DFL, 1=interim DFL, 2=w2k3 DFL > > > > > > Hope that helps, > > > neil > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Tim Onsomu > > > Sent: 16 November 2006 14:35 > > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003? > > > > > > I got curios about this and decide to dcpromo my vm image > of windows > > > 2003 R2. > > > > > > After the AD installation (which sits at Windows 2000 for domain > > > type) I raised the functionality for the domain and forest. > > > > > > The result for domain type was windows 2000. > > > > > > I am not sure it is supposed to be different. > > > > > > Anybody out there who can say their install says something else? > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan > > > Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 3:15 PM > > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003? > > > > > > Were these clean installs or inplace? > > > > > > Bart Van den Wyngaert wrote: > > >> Well I also have a strange thing... It concerns 2 SBS > 2003 systems. > > >> Some months ago I raised both domain and forrest > functional level > > >> on those boxes. By reading this thread I decided to have > a look... > > >> > > >> Both tools report the correct OS actually on both boxes. > > >> > > >> The only I wonder is a bit that they both report with > the gpresult > > >> tool that the domain type is Windows 2000.... > > >> > > >> If I look using GUI, they both report functional level > of domain & > > >> forest being at 2003. > > >> > > >> Don't really get actually. Is this related? Normal or missed > > >> something > > > > > >> when I did raise the functional levels? > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> Bart > > >> > > >> On 11/10/06, Noah Eiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>> Good question. DFL = 2003 and FFL = 2003. So it must > just be some > > >>> lingering text string. Does anyone think there is more it? > > >>> > > >>> Thanks. > > >>> > > >>> -- nme > > >>> > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > >>> From: Clingaman, Bruce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 9:39 AM > > >>> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >>> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> What does it say under: AD Users & Computers | [right click > > >>> domain name] | Raise Domain Functional Level... > > >>> > > >>> ? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Noah > > >>> Eiger > > >>> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 11:12 AM > > >>> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >>> Subject: [ActiveDir] Is it 2000 or 2003? > > >>> > > >>> Hi - > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Several months ago, I upgraded a small, multi-site > domain from W2k > > >>> to > > > > > >>> W2k3. Or so I thought. The various markings in the > schema indicate > > >>> that the upgrade was successful. But when I run, for example, > > >>> gpresult, it reports a Windows 2000 domain. Is this > just some flag > > >>> or > > > > > >>> string that did not get set properly or is there really > a problem > > > with the upgrade? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Thanks. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- nme > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> P.S. I also just noticed that when I run netdiag on a > new W2k3EN > > >>> DC, it says "System info: Windows 2000 Server (Build 3790)". > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> No virus found in this outgoing message. > > >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > >>> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.32/523 - Release Date: > > >>> 11/7/2006 > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > >>> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > >>> List archive: > > >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/ > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> No virus found in this incoming message. > > >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > >>> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.32/523 - Release Date: > > >>> 11/7/2006 > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> No virus found in this outgoing message. > > >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > >>> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.32/523 - Release Date: > > >>> 11/7/2006 > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > >>> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > >>> List archive: > > >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.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@mail.activedir.org/ > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days? > > > http://www.threatcode.com > > > > > > If you are a SBSer and you don't subscribe to the SBS Blog... man > > > ... I will hunt you down... > > > http://blogs.technet.com/sbs > > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > > List archive: > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.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@mail.activedir.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > > PLEASE READ: The information contained in this email is > confidential > > > and intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not an > > > intended recipient of this email please notify the sender > > > immediately and delete your copy from your system. You must not > > > copy, distribute or take any further action in reliance > on it. Email > > > is not a secure method of communication and Nomura > International plc > > > ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by law, accept > > > responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or > completeness of, > > > or (b) the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or > > > disabling code in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If > > > verification of this email is sought then please request a hard > > > copy. Unless otherwise stated this email: (1) is not, and > should not > > > be treated or relied upon as, investment research; (2) contains > > > views or opinions that are solely those of the author and do not > > > necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is intended for > > > informational purposes only and is not a recommendation, > > > solicitation or offer to buy or sell securities or > related financial > > > instruments. NIplc does not provide investment services > to private > > > customers. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Services > > > Authority. Registered in England no. 1550505 VAT No. 447 > 2492 35. > > > Registered Office: 1 St Martin's-le-Grand, London, EC1A 4NP. A > > > member of the Nomura group of companies. > > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > > List archive: > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.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@mail.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@mail.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@mail.activedir.org/ > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
