RE: [ActiveDir] Replication & Satellite Links

2002-11-15 Thread Roger Seielstad
Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > -Original Message- > From: David Rudolph [mailto:david_rudolph@;anadarko.COM] > Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 12:58 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Replication & Satellite Links >

RE: [ActiveDir] Replication & Satellite Links

2002-11-15 Thread David Rudolph
microwave). Dave -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad@;inovis.com] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 7:16 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Replication & Satellite Links Two things. First - why is SMTP replication not an option? Tha

RE: [ActiveDir] Replication & Satellite Links

2002-11-15 Thread Sullivan, Kevin
Title: Message I am guessing you have but just in case. Have you looked for recommendations from the Branch Office Guide?   http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url="/technet/prodtechnol/ad/windows2000/deploy/adguide/DEFAULT.asp   I have found it pretty helpful. I am i

RE: [ActiveDir] Replication & Satellite Links

2002-11-15 Thread Roger Seielstad
Two things. First - why is SMTP replication not an option? That seems like needlessly removing the correct answer to the problem. SMTP replication is designed for high latency, low bandwidth links. Second - Have you considered not putting a DC there at all? If it's a small site, it might be worth

RE: [ActiveDir] Replication & Satellite Links

2002-11-14 Thread John F. Hann
Title: Message I had 240 branches over 256K and latency was around 45 minutes...But I did have replication at every 30 minutes over the 256K links.  When we started we were at 2hrs for replication and that was not a good scenario. -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [m