Greg and j maccraw,
Thank you for the spirited pro/con discussion of domain controllers.
I do see both sides. Even sorta understand most of the rationale each
of you use.
If I can start with only one DC, I will. It is here now and already burning
trons. If needed, I can implement a 2d DC if/when I ever build out my
basement 'server nest' and money allows its' hardware stack.
Yes, I still have some reading to do. Clearly, both of you are talking at a
server level I do not yet grasp! Probably, why I have not done to much with
my server. I suspect it may be nothing more than just another PC (with
special
features I don't play with yet!)
Thanks for the discussion.
Best,
Duncan
At 08:35 10/25/2007 -0500, Greg wrote:
I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree. To me, the situation
you outline below -is- doom and gloom, because I value my time as such that
having to perform those DR steps is more than I'd like to do. Indeed, not
only do I have two live DCs at all times, but each DC is also backed up
(along with the directory state) daily.
Ultimately, perhaps the difference is that even my home domain provides
services to more than just me, and I don't have the time to drop everything
and rebuild it right after a failure.
The only point I was trying to make is that your DC -will- eventually fail
and you will eventually have to recover. With two, not only does your
availability improve, but it also allows you to perform the recovery as
you're able w/o affecting much. That, to me, is the real value.
As I mentioned before, I think virtualizing a second DC is an excellent
idea. You get better machine utilization and still have your live,
replicated copy of AD.
Greg
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardware-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of j maccraw
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 2:34 AM
> To: The Hardware List
> Subject: Re: [H] WINS Server?
>
> I disagree on all counts in a home environment except
> to say that "yes, you
> SHOULD have 2 DC's BECAUSE IT IS EASIER TO KEEP ON
> RUNNING if 1 fails." But You
> must or it WILL FAIL!!! DOOM!???!? LOL, right, not my
> experience with my DC dying.
>
> Let me clarify: I don't rely DC2's sync as a domain
> backup. I've only ever
> brought DC2 online to be able to down & demote DC1 for
> reworking and then backup
> DC2's HDD image. I DO have recent full image backups
> of DC1's drive using True
> Image. Worse case, reset the machine accounts using
> netdom if they got out of
> sync. The important stuff (to me) is users/rights,
> file/folder rights, and GPOs
> which would survive just fine.
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/260575
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/216393
>
> So no, a dead DC would not "cripple" me here unless my
> backups got hosed also.
> When the DC & it's services have gone down all it took
> to recover was to slap
> it's drive in another system or restore it's image to
> a new drive. Meanwhile I
> ran the client pc's just fine from the router DHCP &
> DNS using local accounts in
> the interim. A Windows DC & it's services are a
> CONVENIENCE. Easy DNS, central
> file shares, central user management for locking the
> kids accounts when they're
> bad, easy user & machine policies, a system to
> experiment with the technology
> not live or die core servers.
>
> If I did have a second machine to dedicate to 24/7 use
> (sucking up juice) I'd be
> loading some nix distro, not a second DC though a
> virtual DC un VMWare & nix
> would be nice.
>
> Let's just say:
>
> "Yes, I am well aware of the issues you raise BUT it's
> not unworkable nor is it
> gloom & doom to do it my way for home use. ON the
> other hand, doing it the
> "right" way means overkill of having to buy & run yet
> another power sucking PC
> that does mostly nothing. You got one & the $$$ for
> juice, go right ahead!
>
>
snip
