[ActiveDir] Question about Terminal Svcs
Hello Craig I'd to know how you 'capture' the logon session (not another admin remote session !) in Terminal Service Admin mode. For example, the Lotus Notes Domino creates a particular DOS Command windows that appears ONLY if you logon to Console in every mode you can. The only way that I found is a 'Remote Control capture' progran as Dameware, VNC. If you connect to the same server by Terminal Service you don' see the Dos Command Box (and all that begin from there). Could you explain how it is possible with your way ) Thanks From: Craig Cerino [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Terminal Svcs (was: Infrastructure Master Role and GC) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 13:47:18 -0400 I use TS Admin mode on all my servers (DCs included) and get all pup ups - throttle down processor usage move around as is intended - just as if I'm at the console itself. Maybe I am not reading your email correctly, but I don't understand where the confusion is. Also, you are correct Diane - I had a brain cramp --- should have said cost=application mode. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ayers, Diane Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 1:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ActiveDir] Terminal Svcs (was: Infrastructure Master Role and GC) I'm not clear where cost would be a reason not to use TermSvcs. In TS admin mode, your cost is zero. Application mode is another story One of the issues of using TS as opposed some sort of commercial product is that TS will give you a remote session and not a remote console. There are situations where the remote session will not reflect activity on the console. Application pop-ups, etc. may go to the console and not to the remote session. As you manage tasks, processes, etc you will need to be aware that you are in a session and not at the console. As the admin, you can work around this limitation assuming you know what you are doing. Diane -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Craig Cerino Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 5:30 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Infrastructure Master Role and GC Is there a reason you don't want to use Term Svc ( admin mode) other than the cost? -Original Message- From: Byrne, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 5:26 PM To: ' ([EMAIL PROTECTED])' Subject: [ActiveDir] Infrastructure Master Role and GC Hello, I have AD domain across about 15 Sites. One of the remote sites has a DC with the Infrastructure Master role. I need a GC at this site now and am wondering what terrible things will happen if I make this server (the infrastructure master DC) a Global Catalog? Microsoft says this cant be done? Why? _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts
Ok, Gil or Robbie knows this one, you guys mentioned it at DEC, I just can't find my notes.. I *think* it is called al.exe available from I *think* PSS.. Correct me if I am wrong ( I am almost certain I am ) Mike -Original Message- From: Paul Sobey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 2:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts Hi Guys, Is there a way of centrally determining where an account was locked out, short of looking into event log management packages? One of my users has left himself logged on somewhere, or a drive is mapped, then changed his password, and his account keeps getting locked. I now have 17 domain controllers and it's driving me mad trying to track it down! Cheers, Paul List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts
System Internals has a free tool called psloggedon.exe that will do what you need. Gary York Windows System Engineer Covansys 248-426-7860 -Original Message- From: Paul Sobey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 4:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts Hi Guys, Is there a way of centrally determining where an account was locked out, short of looking into event log management packages? One of my users has left himself logged on somewhere, or a drive is mapped, then changed his password, and his account keeps getting locked. I now have 17 domain controllers and it's driving me mad trying to track it down! Cheers, Paul List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Question about Terminal Svcs
Stefano, I'll obviously let Craig speak for himself, but I don't think he's saying that he absolutely is capturing the Console session (Console:0) through TS. I believe what he's relating is that he can do ALMOST everything from a TS session - as if he WAS standing at the interactive console. IIRC, there is no way to capute the Console session absolutely with TS - but then I could be wrong. Rick Kingslan - Microsoft MVP [Windows NT/2000] Microsoft Certified Trainer MCSA, MCSE+I - Windows NT / 2000 Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. --- Arthur C. Clarke -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of stefano tufillaro Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 3:15 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ActiveDir] Question about Terminal Svcs Hello Craig I'd to know how you 'capture' the logon session (not another admin remote session !) in Terminal Service Admin mode. For example, the Lotus Notes Domino creates a particular DOS Command windows that appears ONLY if you logon to Console in every mode you can. The only way that I found is a 'Remote Control capture' progran as Dameware, VNC. If you connect to the same server by Terminal Service you don' see the Dos Command Box (and all that begin from there). Could you explain how it is possible with your way ) Thanks From: Craig Cerino [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Terminal Svcs (was: Infrastructure Master Role and GC) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 13:47:18 -0400 I use TS Admin mode on all my servers (DCs included) and get all pup ups - throttle down processor usage move around as is intended - just as if I'm at the console itself. Maybe I am not reading your email correctly, but I don't understand where the confusion is. Also, you are correct Diane - I had a brain cramp --- should have said cost=application mode. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ayers, Diane Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 1:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ActiveDir] Terminal Svcs (was: Infrastructure Master Role and GC) I'm not clear where cost would be a reason not to use TermSvcs. In TS admin mode, your cost is zero. Application mode is another story One of the issues of using TS as opposed some sort of commercial product is that TS will give you a remote session and not a remote console. There are situations where the remote session will not reflect activity on the console. Application pop-ups, etc. may go to the console and not to the remote session. As you manage tasks, processes, etc you will need to be aware that you are in a session and not at the console. As the admin, you can work around this limitation assuming you know what you are doing. Diane -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Craig Cerino Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 5:30 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Infrastructure Master Role and GC Is there a reason you don't want to use Term Svc ( admin mode) other than the cost? -Original Message- From: Byrne, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 5:26 PM To: ' ([EMAIL PROTECTED])' Subject: [ActiveDir] Infrastructure Master Role and GC Hello, I have AD domain across about 15 Sites. One of the remote sites has a DC with the Infrastructure Master role. I need a GC at this site now and am wondering what terrible things will happen if I make this server (the infrastructure master DC) a Global Catalog? Microsoft says this cant be done? Why? _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts
Paul, This is what I use to get a list of a person's lockouts from all the
domain controllers on our 2000 network. You have to have elogdmp.exe from
the Windows 2000 Resource Kit in addition to this batch file.
Start of batch file Lockedout.cmd
@ECHO OFF
cls
Rem *** Usage: Lockedout username outputfile
Rem *** Clears out temp file if it exists
Rem *** Filename of }1{ placed in temp folder
if exist %temp%\}1{ del %temp%\}1{
Rem *** One line for each Domain Controller
Rem *** Just cut, paste, and change the name
Echo Scanning DomainController1 Rem *** some visual eye candy for me
elogdmp \\DomainController1 Security |find /i 644 | find /i %1
%temp%\}1{
Echo Scanning DomainController2 Rem *** some visual eye candy for me
elogdmp \\DomainController2 Security |find /i 644 | find /i %1
%temp%\}1{
Rem *** Parses out relevant information and put it to file
for /f tokens=1,2,8,9 delims=,^%% %%a in (%temp%\}1{) do echo %%a %%b %%c
%%d %2
Rem *** Cleans up temp file
if exist %temp%\}1{ del %temp%\}1{
notepad %2
End Batch file
The output looks similar to this. (Names have been changed from the actual
output) You do occasionally catch other information but overall it gets the
job done.
09/16/2002 19:18:43 DomainController1 NTUSER01/\\WRKST038/
09/17/2002 05:31:11 DomainController1 NTUSER01/\\WRKST080/
07/24/2002 16:08:33 DomainController2 cn=NTUSER4E
09/10/2002 13:31:34 DomainController2 NTUSER01/\\WRKST080/
09/12/2002 23:18:47 DomainController2 NTUSER01/\\WRKST038/
Clyde Burns
-Original Message-
From: Paul Sobey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 4:24 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts
Hi Guys,
Is there a way of centrally determining where an account was locked out,
short of looking into event log management packages? One of my users has
left himself logged on somewhere, or a drive is mapped, then changed his
password, and his account keeps getting locked. I now have 17 domain
controllers and it's driving me mad trying to track it down!
Cheers,
Paul
List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts - correction
The 3 lines that start with the words elogdmp, elogdmp, and for /f have wrapped to the next line in my email. The lines immediately below them are are supposed to be part of the original line. Sorry about that. Clyde List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;Q170280; You don't need the enterprise version of NT4. And of course it doesn't require ANY version of Win2k - Win2k wasn't even on the drawing board when the product was released. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 09:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
Yes, it can handle it, but it won't use it in a meaningful way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address space to applications using the rest for operating system use unless the /3GB is used in the boot.ini file (available in advance server only). Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think it applies to 5.5 as well. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
Errr, check that. If you have more than 4GB - (and want to USE it). Server - 4 Procs, 4GB of RAM Adv Serv - 8 Procs, 8GB of RAM Data Center - 32 Procs, 64GB of RAM Rick Kingslan - Microsoft MVP [Windows NT/2000] Microsoft Certified Trainer MCSA, MCSE+I - Windows NT / 2000 Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. --- Arthur C. Clarke -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:20 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
I read from someone else on this list a couple of months ago that the /3gb was not needed to allow W2k server to use up to 4 gb. Are you saying that that person was incorrect? Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:45 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Yes, it can handle it, but it won't use it in a meaningful way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address space to applications using the rest for operating system use unless the /3GB is used in the boot.ini file (available in advance server only). Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think it applies to 5.5 as well. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Question about Terminal Svcs
Hello collegues there is the confirm that there is not possible in Terminal Service to 'miming' a local console. Microsoft declares it in the manual and for security reasons I'm agree. The problem is that in several situations you need 'capturing' the console. The popups screen appearing ONLY on the remote screen and is not guaranteed that you have for every event a log event or that in the eventlog there is written all the informations ! Bye _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
Kevin - Point taken. In this context, you are correct. Rick Kingslan - Microsoft MVP [Windows NT/2000] Microsoft Certified Trainer MCSA, MCSE+I - Windows NT / 2000 Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. --- Arthur C. Clarke -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:45 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Yes, it can handle it, but it won't use it in a meaningful way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address space to applications using the rest for operating system use unless the /3GB is used in the boot.ini file (available in advance server only). Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think it applies to 5.5 as well. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
Title: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT As I understand it Win2k Server can see it...applications however can only utilize up to 2GB of memory addresses by default. The /3GB switch allows applications to utilize up to 3GB of memory addresses instead of the default 2GB. Brian W. Rogers MCSE, MCT, MCP Client/Server Network Developer Tree of Life Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: (904)940-2152 mobile: (904)806-7173 If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its full potential, that word would be meetings. -Dave Barry -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:59 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I read from someone else on this list a couple of months ago that the /3gb was not needed to allow W2k server to use up to 4 gb. Are you saying that that person was incorrect? Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:45 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Yes, it can handle it, but it won't use it in a meaningful way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address space to applications using the rest for operating system use unless the /3GB is used in the boot.ini file (available in advance server only). Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think it applies to 5.5 as well. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
Thread Drifty Diane - now THAT'S comedy -Original Message- From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 1:03 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I agree with Ken. We ran into a memory fragmentation problem with E2K on Win2K standard server. If you have more than 1 GB of memory with E2K, you need to run Win2K advanced. Thread Drify Diane -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:45 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Yes, it can handle it, but it won't use it in a meaningful way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address space to applications using the rest for operating system use unless the /3GB is used in the boot.ini file (available in advance server only). Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think it applies to 5.5 as well. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts
There's EVENTCOMB.EXE from PSS which will let you gather and review event log entries from multiple servers. -g -Original Message- From: Hutchins, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts Ok, Gil or Robbie knows this one, you guys mentioned it at DEC, I just can't find my notes.. I *think* it is called al.exe available from I *think* PSS.. Correct me if I am wrong ( I am almost certain I am ) Mike -Original Message- From: Paul Sobey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 2:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ActiveDir] Locked Accounts Hi Guys, Is there a way of centrally determining where an account was locked out, short of looking into event log management packages? One of my users has left himself logged on somewhere, or a drive is mapped, then changed his password, and his account keeps getting locked. I now have 17 domain controllers and it's driving me mad trying to track it down! Cheers, Paul List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
[ActiveDir] Service Pack 3
So what is the consensus on Service Pack 3 for Windows 2000? I have been running it on my laptop for a while now with no errors. Has anyone had any major problems that resulted from installing Service Pack 3 in their production environment?. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3
7 exchange servers. 3 weeks running Exchange sp3 and Win2ksp3. No problems. Cliff Connelly -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 1:54 PM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3 So what is the consensus on Service Pack 3 for Windows 2000? I have been running it on my laptop for a while now with no errors. Has anyone had any major problems that resulted from installing Service Pack 3 in their production environment?. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3
We are running Exchange with Windows 2000 SP3 just fine. BUT...we did run into a problem with RIS and SP3. Currently our DC's are SP2. The RIS servers were updated before the DC's were. We use a custom automatic naming convention, and this is what caused most of the problem. The RIS server would take the DC into a loop, eventually causing the LSASS process to hit and stay at 100%. It's a rather tedious process to explain what was happening, so if anyone is interested, please drop me an email offline and I'll tear it down for ya. Benton Chase Wink PS - In offline tests, updating the DC to SP3 solved the problem - Benton Chase Wink, CCNA MCSE The University of Texas at Austin McCombs School of Business Enterprise Server Team 512-471-9938 512-619-9016 -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 3:54 PM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3 So what is the consensus on Service Pack 3 for Windows 2000? I have been running it on my laptop for a while now with no errors. Has anyone had any major problems that resulted from installing Service Pack 3 in their production environment?. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3
I have been running SP3 on 15 Production Lotus Notes servers and have seen no problems as of yet. Only problem I am aware of is a problem with local installs of Dell's ITAssistant. Hope this helps Connelly, Cliff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/17/2002 05:23 PM Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc Subject RE: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3 7 exchange servers. 3 weeks running Exchange sp3 and Win2ksp3. No problems. Cliff Connelly -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 1:54 PM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3 So what is the consensus on Service Pack 3 for Windows 2000? I have been running it on my laptop for a while now with no errors. Has anyone had any major problems that resulted from installing Service Pack 3 in their production environment?. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
Nope, more than 2GB. Win2k server will recognize 4GB, but will only let all applications have 2GB of that 4GB. It reserves the other 2GB for OS functions (which is WAY overkill). Read the Q article I posted in another follow up. -Original Message- From: Rick Kingslan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Errr, check that. If you have more than 4GB - (and want to USE it). Server - 4 Procs, 4GB of RAM Adv Serv - 8 Procs, 8GB of RAM Data Center - 32 Procs, 64GB of RAM Rick Kingslan - Microsoft MVP [Windows NT/2000] Microsoft Certified Trainer MCSA, MCSE+I - Windows NT / 2000 Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. --- Arthur C. Clarke -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:20 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
And MS has published a Q article with the following title: XGEN: Exchange 2000 Requires /3GB Switch with More Than 1 Gigabyte of Physical RAM You are braver than I, Tom! -Original Message- From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 3:05 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Cool. Unfortunately once messaging becomes a mission critical application in the enterprise, I can not ignore errors reported by the operating system. YMMV however... Diane -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I disagree, in theory and in practice. The problem I experience is that it logs an event telling me it's fragmented. Which I ignore. -Original Message- From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:03 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I agree with Ken. We ran into a memory fragmentation problem with E2K on Win2K standard server. If you have more than 1 GB of memory with E2K, you need to run Win2K advanced. Thread Drify Diane -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:45 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Yes, it can handle it, but it won't use it in a meaningful way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address space to applications using the rest for operating system use unless the /3GB is used in the boot.ini file (available in advance server only). Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think it applies to 5.5 as well. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info :
RE: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3
I have been running SP3 on my Exch 2K servers (4) and all other servers (around 36) and have had no issues as of yet. -Original Message- From: John Hicks/MIS/HQ/KEMET/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3 I have been running SP3 on 15 Production Lotus Notes servers and have seen no problems as of yet. Only problem I am aware of is a problem with local installs of Dell's ITAssistant. Hope this helps Connelly, Cliff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/17/2002 05:23 PM Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc Subject RE: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3 7 exchange servers. 3 weeks running Exchange sp3 and Win2ksp3. No problems. Cliff Connelly -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 1:54 PM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3 So what is the consensus on Service Pack 3 for Windows 2000? I have been running it on my laptop for a while now with no errors. Has anyone had any major problems that resulted from installing Service Pack 3 in their production environment?. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3
Justin, Broke our Adobe Acrobat PDF printer (Had to roll back to SP2 and re-install) and know of issues with Hummingbird Exceed other than I have had no problems... James -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 18 September 2002 8:07 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3 It broke our Network Appliance NutScratch, er, um, I mean NetCache when we put it on our DCs. It will no longer authenticate users against our AD domain. NetApp is working with us to fix it. Other than that, we've seen no problems. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 3:54 PM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] Service Pack 3 So what is the consensus on Service Pack 3 for Windows 2000? I have been running it on my laptop for a while now with no errors. Has anyone had any major problems that resulted from installing Service Pack 3 in their production environment?. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
Sorry, I didn't mean I have always ignored it. I researched the heck out of it, discussed it with PSS and with other Exchange MVPs, and found it to be harmless both in theory and practice. So having performed due diligence and discovered that /in a non-clustered, non-Win2k Adv. Srvr environment/ it can be safely ignored, I now safely ignore it. And I didn't have to waste the taxpayers' money for an OS upgrade that I don't need. -tom -Original Message- From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 03:05 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Cool. Unfortunately once messaging becomes a mission critical application in the enterprise, I can not ignore errors reported by the operating system. YMMV however... Diane -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I disagree, in theory and in practice. The problem I experience is that it logs an event telling me it's fragmented. Which I ignore. -Original Message- From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:03 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I agree with Ken. We ran into a memory fragmentation problem with E2K on Win2K standard server. If you have more than 1 GB of memory with E2K, you need to run Win2K advanced. Thread Drify Diane -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:45 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Yes, it can handle it, but it won't use it in a meaningful way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address space to applications using the rest for operating system use unless the /3GB is used in the boot.ini file (available in advance server only). Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think it applies to 5.5 as well. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
No, I'm not. I just read *all* the q-articles that pertain to the issue. That article pertains to Windows 2000 Advanced Server only. I don't use Advanced Server. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q314736 The /3GB switch can have a significant effect on memory fragmentation and even contribute to memory fragmentation on a server that runs Windows 2000 Server (but not on a server that runs Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Microsoft Windows 2000 Datacenter Server). You should not use this switch with Windows 2000 Server. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 05:03 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT And MS has published a Q article with the following title: XGEN: Exchange 2000 Requires /3GB Switch with More Than 1 Gigabyte of Physical RAM You are braver than I, Tom! -Original Message- From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 3:05 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Cool. Unfortunately once messaging becomes a mission critical application in the enterprise, I can not ignore errors reported by the operating system. YMMV however... Diane -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I disagree, in theory and in practice. The problem I experience is that it logs an event telling me it's fragmented. Which I ignore. -Original Message- From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:03 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I agree with Ken. We ran into a memory fragmentation problem with E2K on Win2K standard server. If you have more than 1 GB of memory with E2K, you need to run Win2K advanced. Thread Drify Diane -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:45 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Yes, it can handle it, but it won't use it in a meaningful way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address space to applications using the rest for operating system use unless the /3GB is used in the boot.ini file (available in advance server only). Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think it applies to 5.5 as well. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ:
RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT
I guess talking to MS is like calling the IRS for us U.S. folks. Depends on who you talk to affects what kind of answer you get. Our discussions with PSS and the Exchange folks at MS was that it was an issue and we'd see degraded performance over time. We erred on the cautious side. Heck, we're bankrupt so O/S upgrades for everyone! Diane -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 3:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Sorry, I didn't mean I have always ignored it. I researched the heck out of it, discussed it with PSS and with other Exchange MVPs, and found it to be harmless both in theory and practice. So having performed due diligence and discovered that /in a non-clustered, non-Win2k Adv. Srvr environment/ it can be safely ignored, I now safely ignore it. And I didn't have to waste the taxpayers' money for an OS upgrade that I don't need. -tom -Original Message- From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 03:05 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Cool. Unfortunately once messaging becomes a mission critical application in the enterprise, I can not ignore errors reported by the operating system. YMMV however... Diane -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I disagree, in theory and in practice. The problem I experience is that it logs an event telling me it's fragmented. Which I ignore. -Original Message- From: Ayers, Diane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:03 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT I agree with Ken. We ran into a memory fragmentation problem with E2K on Win2K standard server. If you have more than 1 GB of memory with E2K, you need to run Win2K advanced. Thread Drify Diane -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:45 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Yes, it can handle it, but it won't use it in a meaningful way. Windows 2000 will only allocate a max of 2GB of address space to applications using the rest for operating system use unless the /3GB is used in the boot.ini file (available in advance server only). Indeed, some applications (like exchange) get confused if there is more memory in the machine than it can get to. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q266096 for details. This Q article is for exchange 2000, but I think it applies to 5.5 as well. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:24 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT W2k Server can handle up to 4GB of Mem before you need to go to ADV Server -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 12:20 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You would also need advance server if your server has more than 2GB or so of memory. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT But not if it is just one exchange server on one windows server? -Original Message- From: David M Ha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:29 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT You will need W2K AS if you want to run a cluster. -Original Message- From: Salandra, Justin A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:12 AM To: ActiveDir (E-mail) Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange Std to ENT Can someone direct me to a Q article that shows to steps to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 STD to 5.5 ENT? Plus, Exchange 5.5 ENT doesn't require W2K Advanced Server right? I read that when Exchange was installed on nt4 that the ENT version of 5.5 needed to be installed on the Enterprise version of NT4. Justin A. Salandra, MCSE Senior Network Engineer Catholic Healthcare System 914.681.8117 office 646.483.3325 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir% 40mail.activedir.org/ List info :
Re: [ActiveDir] Util/software to Log into Multiple AD domains for Administration
Charles that is exactly what I want to do, using native tools I want to be able to do this, I have tried the netbios null session but in domains with tight security policies this doesnt work, for example if I am logged into a computer on DomainA, and I want to connect to and administer DomainB \\DCindomainB\ipc$ * /USER: username then it ask for password, If provided I can now do alot of things in here, but this is clumsy in NT4 Symantec made a program that allows you to select which domain you want to log into before it give you the login prompt, so it stores multiple information about multiple domains in the registry somewhere I was wondering if anyone has seen one of these for 2k Pro, we all know about the remote control apps , but their is a lot of security risk involved and I dont like the overhead, I just thought I wasnt surfin the net enough to find it, but I guess one doesnt exist. thanks for all the input - Original Message - From: Steve Williams To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 5:37 PM Subject: [ActiveDir] Util/software to Log into Multiple AD domains for Administration I log into about 10 different AD domains for Nets that I support, has anyone ever run into a utility that allows you to select which domain you want to select when you boot up, their used to be one for NT4 Wks that you could set up for multiple domains, I am tired of having to log in locally then rejoining a domain to be able to administer it, does anyone do this ?? Thanks in advance
[ActiveDir] Diagnostic Tools
Hi, Has anyone had success with the 'Branch Office' QA scripts? That is, the batch files and visual basic scripts that check the servers state etc. using the common tools such as dcdiag, netdiag etc. Also, does anyone have any ideas on how to automate this process on DC's in a forest. I'm looking at creating batch files (on a floppy) to be executed during DC creation and scheduling tasks to run these batch files which will utilize the tools mentioned above. To make life easier I will also be copying the tasks so they can be copied to every DC (yes, there will be a common monitoring file structure). I also ran into an example batch file that keeps the result text files for these tools for several days with time stamps. I'm just wondering if anyone has come across another easier method to deploy these tools. Rgds, _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
