the prereqs check do an *Active Directory Domain Functional Level Check*, so you'll get a warning or error if it's not happy.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Andreas Hammarskjöld < [email protected]> wrote: > Unless they coded stuff to check the level value you shouldn’t run into > issues. I would just go for it. > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Denzik, Josh > *Sent:* den 11 februari 2016 15:38 > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: [mssms] SCCM 1511 and Domain Functional Level > > > > we are planning on raising the level to 2008 r2 waiting on some stuff with > a vendor. We have no plans to do this just curious to see if anyone has > tried it. > > > > *From:* [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *Jason Sandys > *Sent:* Thursday, February 11, 2016 9:32 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [mssms] SCCM 1511 and Domain Functional Level > > > > > > Chaos. Dogs eating cats. Global Warming. A woman in the Whitehouse. > > > > J/K > > > > AD is AD is AD. It’s not supported because Microsoft doesn’t support > anything 2003 related anymore. But nothing has changed AD wise that > ConfigMgr does. It just creates a few classes when the schema is extended > and then creates and refreshes a few objects from those classes during > normal operations. Thus, it’ll work fine. > > > > Why would you leave the core of your entire network in the form of AD on > something completely unsupported though? > > > > J > > > > *From: * <[email protected]> on behalf of "Denzik, Josh" < > [email protected]> > *Reply-To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> > *Date: *Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 9:18 AM > *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> > *Subject: *[mssms] SCCM 1511 and Domain Functional Level > > > > Anyone know what would happen if your domain functional level was at 2003 > and you installed SCCM 1511? > > > > -Josh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
