>From my side, it looked as if result #5 in that search query should have
been a link to an associated petri.com article.  Perhaps this is a better
search for you:

https://www.google.com/search?q=windows+cleanup+a+removed+server+from+active+directory


This search should have quite a few Microsoft articles for cleanup
procedures.  Even in a seemingly graceful demotion, things might not be so
graceful behind the scenes, and you are left with extinct/widowed server
metadata that requires cleanup.


--
Espi


On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Michael Leone <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Micheal Espinola Jr <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Undoubtedly there is leftover metadata in active directory.
>>
>
> Yes, but where? :-)
>
>
>
>>
>> https://www.google.com/search?q=Replication+errors+after+DC+demotion
>>
>> Your subject line is a good start for a search query.  Also search on
>> event IDs specific to your issues.  The petri.com links are typically
>> spot-on.
>>
>
>
> I searched petri.com for "DFS Replication errors after DC demotion". Got
> no hits .... Joining the forum there now ...
>
> Most of the Google search results are for cleaning up metadata after
> unsuccessful demotion. But mine gracefully demoted - it isn't still listed
> as a DC. I looked at the  Topology under Domain System Volume in
> DFSR-GlobalSettings, in System - nothing there about the old DC, either.
>
> The DFSR Health Report lists the errors, but tells me all servers are
> available for reporting. A propagation test from the sole DC passes, as it
> shows no members (which is correct, as there are no other members).
>
> Ntdsutil metadata cleanup doesn't show the old server as something to be
> removed, either.
>
> It's not in Sites and Services anymore, either.
>
>
>
>> --
>> Espi
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Michael Leone <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Still getting these, unfortunately. Guess there's something still hidden
>>> somewhere, that thinks the demoted DCs should be participating in
>>> replicating the Domain System Volume, even tho I see no reference to them
>>> in the GUI DFSR manager, nor the CLI utilities. I guess I will end up using
>>> ADSIEdit somewhere ... guess there's more searching in my future ...
>>>
>>> Anyone have any pointers or clues as to why, and how to fix it?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Michael Leone <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In testing my AD Win2008 R2 -to- Win2012 R2 upgrade, I successfully
>>>> added a Win2012 R2 DC to my domain. Then I demoted the Win2008 R2 DCs. That
>>>> went well, with this exception:
>>>>
>>>> DCDIAG is showing me DFS Replication errors (0xC0001396, 0xC000138A,
>>>> and 0xC0001394) about failing to communicate with partner <Win2008 R2 DC>
>>>> for replication of the Domain System Volume.
>>>>
>>>> Well, yeah - that isn't a DC anymore, just a member server, so it has
>>>> nothing to do with the Domain System Volume anymore. But what I can't
>>>> figure out is why the Win2012 server is still trying to talk to it at all,
>>>> after it was gracefully demoted.
>>>>
>>>> I added the DFS Namespaces and DFS Replication roles to the Win2012
>>>> server (now the only DC in that domain). And under Replication, I see the
>>>> Domain System Volume, but I see no references to any other server.
>>>>
>>>> So why did it show those errors? Note that the timestamps of the errors
>>>> are immediately following the demotions; haven't see them re-occur (yet -
>>>> it's only been a couple hours since I did it). Firewall is off, so it's not
>>>> blocking ports.
>>>>
>>>> "DFSRDIAG dumpadcfg" isn't telling me anything (I think - never used
>>>> this before). I see no reference to the demoted WIn2008 DC ...
>>>>
>>>> DFSRADMIN mem list /rgname:"Domain System Volume: shows only 1 member -
>>>> the Win2012 DC.
>>>>
>>>> So here's my question:
>>>>
>>>> based on the DFRDIAG and DFRADMIN outputs, am I right in assuming that
>>>> those errors mentioning the Win2008 DC are just transitory, and caused by
>>>> the DC demotion?
>>>>
>>>> I'm thinking this is nothing to worry about. Am I right?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to