*>>This isn't about subverting or replacing AD replication, but about DR recovery of a DC. <<*
So, what you're saying is that you'd prefer to rely upon a barely supported configuration -- vs a fully supported configuration -- at a time when you are already under stress to get back to a fully functional state in your computing environment?!? Alrighty then... Regards, *ASB* *http://XeeMe.com/AndrewBaker <http://xeeme.com/AndrewBaker>* *Providing Expert Technology Consulting Services for the SMB market…* * GPG: *1AF3 EEC3 7C3C E88E B0EF 4319 8F28 A483 A182 EF3A On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Michael Leone <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Brian Desmond <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Regardless of the virtualization safeguards probably mitigating risk, I > > still come back to the original question which is why subvert a system > which > > has its own replication mechanism (AD) with the vmWare alternative? > Perhaps > > there’s a detail I’m missing here but that’s where this breaks down for > me. > > > This isn't about subverting or replacing AD replication, but about DR > recovery of a DC. If a DC at a site becomes unavailable (such as for > broken physical connectivity to the site), this way the same DC comes > back online, at a reachable site (but with the same IP subnets). You > haven't done anything with AD replication, except rely on it to find > the DC when it comes back online, and sync with it. Effectively, you > are using AD replication exactly as it's supposed to work - > re-establish replication when the DC connectivity comes back online. > > What you're bypassing is a rebuild of a destroyed DC, and bypassing > the need to clean up AD of the old DC, before building a new DC. > > >
