Maybe you should read about eDIR/NDS... :) Novell did this back in '93.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley
[MVP]
Sent: 06 October 2005 01:51
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
I'd
Thanks for the replies guys
Joe, converting the administrator wellknown sid to user seems like a great
idea - but then involves copying the .exe into the local machines first and
executing it?
Havent work out how to do it without copying the sid converter program...if
so would have to copy it
_vbscript_ version below. If you launch this
with:
wscript scriptname.vbs
then it won't create a window (so you don't need quiet)
I've added an inital check so the program just terminates if the needed time has
passed.
Joe - I can't get to your web site today; nslookup
doesn't give me an
I think that the difficulty is because you're trying to
schedule a task to do somethingwhich (I think) it was never intended to
do. All the scheduled tasks I use are ones which run without interfering with
what's happening on the desktop - the last thing I want is for (eg) a backup
process
i'm trying to get rid of all those fields except sAMAccountName with perl.
any ideas?
can oldcmp take as input the same file it created to disable accounts?
anyway, i'd like to know how to parse that file in perl and get rid of all the fields except that one and use that file as input to oldcmp
Hi guys,
Im having trouble logging on remotely to some of my pcs on the net work. When I
try logon it gives me The local policy of this system does not permit you to
logon interactively. I am a Domain administrator so i cant see how it can be
rights. Are there group policy setting that im
Hi,
Basically I want to take report on the permissions given to the users in the File and printer server.Does windows 2000 serverhave the inbuilt tools or does any third part tools satisfy my requirement.
Regards,
Senthil
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
Assuming you've chosen to output OLDCMP's report
switchto CSV format, youcould start with something like below.
In this example, "oldcmp.txt" is the name of the output file you've generated
with OLDCMP.
Hope it helps give you some ideas...probably not
really the polished version : - )
cacls.exe?
Thank you and have a splendid day!
Kind Regards,
Freddy Hartono Group Support Engineer InternationalSOS Pte Ltd mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] phone:
(+65) 6330-9740 - temp
From: Senthil Kumar
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 6:24
PMTo: Active directory
Hi All,
Whenever I do LDAP search for any user
in AD through browser, (ldap://DC server IP ) it gives me error
An error accured while performing the search. Your computer, ISP or
the specified directory services may be disconnected. Check ur connections
and try again. Operations Error
I have
Dumpsec is a nice free tool that should do the job too
http://www.somarsoft.com/
I've used it a few times and it has definitely helped out.
Thanks
Mike
On 10/10/05, Freddy HARTONO [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
cacls.exe?
Thank you and have a splendid day!
Kind Regards,
Freddy Hartono Group
I have a W2K AD that I want to migrate to
W2K3 AD. Whats the best option: In-place upgrade of the W2K DC or
standing up a brand new W2K3 DC server
And then upgrade the W2K DC to W2K3?
By the way the W2K DC is also running DNS,
DHCP, WINS. I have one more DNS server. If I go the
My personal opinion is that you carry less crap over if you bring
up a new 2k3 DC (even if only temporarily). You can always reformat and
reuse the original server then move it back if you need to.
Bob
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alborzfard,
AlexPosted
I would, if budget allows, go the second
route. Do the schema upgrade bring up new windows 2003 server. Migrate FSMO
roles to it. Move DNS,WINS etc to the new server and then DCPROMO, one at time,
your other servers out. Reinstall them with W2K3 and dcpromo them back in. Did
this with a
Ah, Brettsh, maybe that explains why I had trouble opening my Exchange
5.5 store with Access 97 ;)
Rich
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brett Shirley
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 10:29 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE:
Agreed, although you should be careful to note (and take appropriate actions
for) any apps that utilize hard coded DNS server entries prior to sunsetting
the original 2K DC.
It's always been a best practice to stand up a new DC vs. upgrade in place.
Not a hard and fast rule, but a best
What happens if you specify ldap://domainname ? Just out of curiousity.
Using IE or some other browser?
IE relies on OE IIRC to handle LDAP searches. How are your directory
settings in OE configured exactly?
From: Sudhir Kaushal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
When we have inplaced upgraded SBS 2000's to SBS 2003's they leave
behind a mixmass of permissions i.e. a blend of 2000 and 2003. Many
in our gang really do not like inplaces at all. You don't get a
comparable box to a clean 2003.
You want nice, clean 2003 permission structure? You'll
Title: Schema Updates
Not sure why you don't like Unity, it's the best unified
messaging app there is right now. Actually has been for over 5 years. I believe
that the reason it;s as good as it is, is that it was not created or even
modified much by Cisco, they simply bought a really good
Your blog link being what? :)
:m:dsm:cci:mvp marcusoh.blogspot.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brett Shirley
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 1:32 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Adding custom fields to AD
While I generally agree this would be great, I have to ask about eDir and
it's authentication abilities. IIRC, multiple domains via LDAP only work
just fine. It's called ADAM in its latest incarnation. But for the
authentication[1] and other apps that support/work with AD to provide
IF i am correct, you are placing this script in computer startup, then
it won't resolve LOGONSERVER variable..
instead, you can use \\domain.com\netlogon
which will always resolve to nearest DC.
--
Kamlesh
On 10/10/05, Freddy HARTONO [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the replies guysJoe,
Also check if you have hosts and lmhosts files, and static WINS entries
if WINS is running on your DCs. We (different org) had issues once with
static mappings and apps looking for a certain machine name, we brought
up a new W2K DC, and then demoted DC1, rebuilt it with the same name,
and
Hi Mulnick,
I get the same error when i give ldap://domainname.
Yes i am using IE. Sorry i didnt get what u mean to ask by How
are your directory
settings in OE configured exactly?
Regards,
Sudhir
This
Thanks for the advice! Excuse my
ignorance, but how do I upgrade the schema, while Im installing the
WIN2K3 server? Ditto for migrating FSMOs.
Does it mean that I would have a 2K and
2K3 AD domain coexisting for a while until I remove 2K AD?
When you said move DNS, WINS, DHCP, you
meant
Also,
I don't think the command u r using for extracting administrators name also works, independently.
Try this one,
for /f tokens=1-2 Delims=: %%A in ('SidToName.exe s-1-5-32-544 ^| find \') do set gpoadminvar=%%B
On 10/10/05, Kamlesh Parmar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IF i am correct, you are
Heck NetBEUI with all broadcasts would work
perfectfor all internal SBS needs. :o)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley,
CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 12:33
AMTo: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: Re: [ActiveDir]
You are holding onto that 3.50 functionality anger much too long Darren
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 12:51 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Adding custom
Ah true, I didn't think uses of ADAM which I think may make more sense than
AD for some of those internet uses.
So do we have a timeline on these blog entries? eg
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brett Shirley
Sent: Monday, October 10,
I've had to do this a couple of times, but chose a different solution for most
of my customers, since they didn't really want to download and execute another
tool when running a startup script on their computers.
While resolving the SID is certainly the most exact solution, my approach has
To move this in a slightly different direction. How would people feel about
a BlackComb Super Forest Functional Mode where not only are DCs impacted but
every machine touching the DCs are affected. I.E. MS allows multiple domains
on a single DC but not for any pre-BlackComb clients. I.E. Complete
Can't you run sid2user from the netlogon share?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Freddy HARTONO
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:08 AM
To: 'ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org'
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Adding local admin rights to non english
In order to understand what Novell did/does we need to stop using terms
like DC and domain and instead think of partitions within the
directory.
Novell allowed the directory to be carved up into manageable chunks
(partitions) and then for these partitions to be replicated as read only
or read
Check out the upgrade docs at http://www.microsoft.com/ad and the readme
that comes with your 2003 server media for more specifics.
You won't coexist, you'll insert a 2K3 DC into your 2K domain/forest. As for
DNS, DHCP, and WINS, the migration is a little different.
DNS - If AD integrated,
Just bring up a new 2k3 server, DCPromo it and it will do the rest
as the first 2k3 DC. Once it is successfully promoted transfer all
roles. Once you are sure everything is transferred and working correctly
you can DCPromo to demote the old server wipe reinstall whatever. There is
no
Hi Alex
Get hold of the MS article on upgrading
Windows 2000 Ad to 2003. Basically you will need to do the schema extensions on
your current Schema master. Once the changes have replicated to your other DCs
then bring up your first W2K3 DC and move the FSMO roles, taking into account
http://blogs.msdn.com/brettsh/
I would post a comment to the blog, but it requires a post first. :)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:05 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE:
Title: Schema Updates
Being the best available doesn't make something good and
doesn't need a lot of work. :o)
It just means it is better than the other sucky
alternatives.
I haven't seen unity in years but when I last saw it, it
had me swearing about how bad it was. I seem to recall
Does anyone happen to know a rough idea
how many bytes are transmitted when a single user logs on to an XP box to a
W2K3 AD, assuming cached credentials aside? Ive been goog
searching and finding a lot of detailed info about replication but not much
about the size of the authentication
For us, it's the ability to run parallel domains for test/development
purposes. We have our production domain, my IT test domain, and our LOB
application test domain. I'd have another IT test domain if I had the
available hardware right now.
We are required to test and document all changes to the
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,122949,00.asp
Virtual WindowsLicense
Simplified
QUOTE
Microsoft also will allow customers to have four virtual
machines running on top of Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition and Windows
Server "Longhorn" Datacenter Edition at no extra cost,
All,
I am pondering the possibility of automating the creation of development
environments. The problem I am hoping to solve is that a lot of our testing
needs to be done in an environment where all our Ous, GPOs, Groups and so
forth are present. Recreating this is a nightmare, so to alleviate
You need to upgrade the schema first (before you install the first 2k3
DC). Do an adprep /forestprep from the 2003 CD on the 2000 box.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
c -
312.731.3132
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
it would certainly be a good way to promote the sales for client
inventory tools ;-)
/Guido
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Montag, 10. Oktober 2005 16:32
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] BlackComb Super
2 immediate comments:
- Blackcomb clients would need to be available several years before the
blackcomb server.
- Impact on non-Windows clients would need to be assessed. [SAMBA, nix,
Mac etc]
neil
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Good suggestion Joe and, in principal, I agree ... but were that to make it
to reality, I'd question why the legacy domain model persists. Domains are,
IMO, an outdated and overly rigid technology ... obviously, there many
features that would require significant modification (some of which will
Does anyone happen to know a rough idea
how many bytes are transmitted when a single user logs on to an XP box to a
W2K3 AD, assuming cached credentials aside? Ive been goog
searching and finding a lot of detailed info about replication but not much
about the size of the authentication
Outlook Express (OE) and Search for People use the same WAB provider IIRC.
When you open ldap://servername you're really making a call to use WAB.EXE
which is the same address book that OE uses to search for users. I notice
though, that if you specify a server to contact, that you get that
Upgrade KBs:
See:
MS-KBQ314649_W2K3 ADPREP Command Causes Mangled Attributes in W2K Forests That
Contain E2K Servers
MS-KBQ325379_How to Upgrade Windows 2000 Domain Controllers to Windows Server
2003
MS-KBQ555040_Common Mistakes When Upgrade Windows 2000 Domain To Windows 2003
my BAD :) yes, AT /interactive works with GUI apps.
Joe Every method you list below
messes with changing user context and IMO added complexity in a case where it
isn't necessary.As
I mentioned earlier and you confirmed that, running under SYSTEM
context is very bad, so If I want to use Task
Depends on how it's implemented. If it is really multiple AD
domains/forests (full functionality for all three) then I would be all for
it as it would greatly simplify multi-forest deployments and really be a
cause for celebration for new deployments. However, it would be interesting
to see
I assume, copying it locally on first run, will make the subsequent run bit faster.
Do correct me, if I am mistaken...On 10/10/05, joe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can't you run sid2user from the netlogon share?-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Title: Schema Updates
And I will never run Windows because 3.11 just wasn't that
great at networking. ;-)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
joeSent: Monday, October 10, 2005 9:42 AMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Being
Yes, Microsoft has attempted it. Check out the scripts directory under
the GPMC install. It has two scripts:
CreateXMLFromEnvironment.wsf and
CreateEnvironmentFromXML.wsf
That do pretty much everything that you've described below.
Darren
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to upgrade Windows 2000 domain controllers to Windows Server 2003
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=325379
Just follow the steps for forestprep domainprep and then introduce win2003 DC. It will be in same domain.This also covers, some checks for exchange too.
Of all the services, DHCP can
I think that's something that needs to happen eventually; if exciting
innovations are going to continue to occur, then they really can't be
hamstrung by legacy support requirements.
joe's suggestion of a functional level-type mechanism for this is
quite a useful one: for those orgs that still
Exporting users, groups etc and then recreating them in a new environment is
not terribly difficult. Getting the security settings and the GPO
information recreated is a bit more difficult. This is not an export and
copy, it's an export and create new that looks like the old situation if you
I am copying the exact post from Tiro Yann,
Hi Activedir List :)
A new free tool is now available here
http://www.yside.com/projects/tools.htm
which name is XSync v0.2
It duplicates your real AD Domain in a test lab with no SID issues.
Thanks a lot to Chris Wall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
) who made
Why would you want to have them several years earlier available? I don't see
this feature (although major) anything different then the 'native mode' switch
you have in AD and Exchange.
Once you have upgraded everything to BlackComb you could make the switch.
Might even help moving people to
I agree. SMB business can be very complex.
Can you expand on the idea that VM's aren't working well for you? I'm trying
to understand the difference between that and a multiple domain DC for that
scenario.
I'd have to say that smaller, cheaper dc's (desktop class?) have always
worked well
http://blogs.msdn.com/virtual_pc_guy/archive/2005/10/10/479186.aspx
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
joeSent: Monday, October 10, 2005 11:06 AMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] Movement in
licensing over Virtual Instances at MS.
Sweet!!
-ASB
FAST, CHEAP, SECURE: Pick Any TWO
http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/
On 10/10/05, joe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,122949,00.asp
Virtual Windows License Simplified
QUOTE
Microsoft also will allow customers to have four virtual machines
Title: Most common cause of Active Directory "failures"?
Here's the summary of the results from last weeks informal survey. By far
the most popular cause of AD failure is the inadvertant misconfiguration of MSFT
DNS, which is interesting, because that was true 2 years ago as well. I guess
Sudhir do you have a network sniff of the original problem? I think
that's likely the easiest way to diagnose this. That way we see the
problem itself.
~Eric
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Al Mulnick
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 9:04
or an entirely new model not yet conceived ...
Perhaps something that doesn't require NT4 to W2K style migration
headaches to keep people from moving to it the way that migration did...
I'd hate to see a show of hands for who here is still trying to
determine if they should make that leap off
:-P
I think someone needs to run SBS at home. See what nice solid DNS/AD is
all about :-)
lurk mode back on
joe wrote:
Heck NetBEUI with all broadcasts would work perfect for all internal
SBS needs. :o)
*From:*
Im a bit confused as to what she
was trying to say in the quote below, she says four VMs, but she doesnt say four instances of
Windows and she says that theyll only charge for virtual images
of Windows actually running. I take that to mean that if I have a box
with 10 virtual machines
Rich-
This paper isn't XP/2003 but essentially a lot of the same principals
apply. I found this paper very illuminating in it's day so maybe it will
be of some use to you. As far as the feasibility, I spent a lot of time
at the wrong end of an ISDN line and it wasn't that bad but I never had
The limitations of the VMs are the underlying hardware, in our case. I
have 9 VMs running on one server. It's choking for more RAM, but
management won't foot the bill for the additional riser card and ram.
Otherwise, no limitations in functionality. If I had adequate hdw to run
the VMs I could use
Thanks Bob... I actually used that article too, once upon a time, though
it's way more detail than I was looking for. There's another one more
recent, it goes into server authentication details - way TMI. You know,
we're not even talking multiple machines, just one. The serious thing is
that we
My understanding is as follows:
1
licensed copy of W2K3R2 or Longhorn (EE/DC) provides the following:
1
physical host running the licensed OS
4
virtual guests running the licensed OS or a lesser version (i.e. Enterprise
Edition would allow for Web Edition
Title: Most common cause of Active Directory failures?
Suggestions as to how to make this more effective (I don't
have any money to spend on this, so large cash-valueprizes are right out
:)
How about an all expenses paid trip to DEC
in Vegas, entry to the NDA lunch and of course the
Sounds like we need an LDAP.SYS that is similar to HTTP.SYS in that it
can act as a routing, queuing, and parsing mechanism to determine which
LDAP namespace/partition or domain an inbound request is destined for.
With such a mechanism in place registration/advertisement (DNS) of the
various LDAP
If you just want to make a quick change, go into the
registry and delete the policy subtrees (from HKCU or HKLM, or both).
They'll come back on the next policy refresh, but it'll give you a few
minutes. I can't remember off the top of my head where those setting are
stored:
Title: Most common cause of Active Directory failures?
you forgot to mention the amount USD in
casino chips you would like to find in your complimentary hotel room upon
arrival ;-)
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: Monday, October
And I wholeheartedly applaud dreaming. Without it we'd still be in a dark
wet cave, chewing on roots and hoping to keep warm ;-)
It's just that I don't think the licensing case is the big issue. I would
guess that Microsoft licensing would find another way to get the pound of
flesh. I don't
HKLM\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows
NT\Terminal Services. Already have tried the deletion but you have to
keep on doing it if you want to make changes to Citrix. I was hoping
there was a Disable Secure RDP registry setting that wouldnt
gray anything out (as in W2K).
-Ryan
I have a contact with the addy of [EMAIL PROTECTED].
I created a smtp connector with an address space of *.domain.com.
when exchange 2k sends an email destined for [EMAIL PROTECTED] thru that smtp connector, it rewrites the addy in the RCPT TO: as
[EMAIL PROTECTED], taking out the servename.
Yeah I didn't want to state going away completely from the domain model. My
basic idea is to do something different than is allowed by current legacy
systems and their support. Allowing multiple domains on a single DC sounds
like an easy way for people to visualize it. It could, in fact, be
Don't get lost in the details yet. I tried to give a specific example to
help clarify the general concept of I have switch labeled Hurray that shuts
off legacy support, it launches Windows into a whole new non-NT compatible
auth/authz system. It seems to me if we keep the legacy stuff in there, it
Define within reason.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rocky Habeeb
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 12:33 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Modifying Domain Admins Administrators Group
Is a tool like that
Totally guessing here from the Dr. J password literature I've read...but
wouldn't it depend on the auth method involved as to the traffic size?
Since NTLMv2 is MS specific... you might have to fire up the sniff tools
on that one.
Chapter 11 in the Riley/Johansson book on passwords
LMhash ...
Title: Most common cause of Active Directory failures?
Maybe I shouldnt be pushing so hard
to take over DNS operations for clients and servers. ;-)
Actually, we manage the SRV records only, and
while they are a bit tricky, but once its working it just works. But
trying to explain whats
Title: Schema Updates
Entirely your option. :) Windows 3.11 and Windows NT are
really not the same product.
Note I am not saying I won't use cisco routers because they
sucked 12 years ago. As someone else pointed out, software isn't cisco's ball of
wax. There is obviously a little bit of a
Title: Most common cause of Active Directory "failures"?
Hmm DNS you say...
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gil
KirkpatrickSent: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:06 PMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgCc: Christine
McDermottSubject: [ActiveDir] Results of survey -
Hi Ryan,
The greying out of the settings is a "good thing".
Basically any well designed program that provides a user interface to a regitry
setting should grey out settings that are managed via the Policy key. This is
really saying "This setting is set via policy. Don't fiddle with it".
Won't work for me. I have about 50,000 users in my home AD on about 3
domains and 8 DCs... Oh I also have trusts to a couple of R2 and NT4
Domains. eg
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley, CPA
aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
Sent:
You should be able to just do domain.com and it will pick up any
child domains, unless you have a child that needs special
priveledges.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom
KernPosted At: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:28 PMPosted To:
I mostly agree.
The Data Center Edition according to some of the other
links out there indicate that it will allow unlimited instances on
it.
As for the not running category, I think it means that
unless the instance is at that moment running, it doesn't need a license. So you
could have
One thing that seems a
bit silly to me is if I have my new 64 bit server, GOLIATH, and hes running 10
VMs with Windows, then hes running 10 W2K3 kernels, 10 HALs, 10 __
(fill in the blank). There was a concept, sort of filled by NTVDM, that
you could run something in there and if
I don't think the issue is there. When you make an LDAP call, you specify
where you want to go, the hierarchy is all there and required in the call.
Also I don't believe the issue is in SYSVOL, if you look at the sysvol
structure, it has the domain component in there. In fact when I first saw
that
Well, that's really my point. You can't really take away some of those
apps that exist today. They're too ingrained in the way people use the
technology. They really are the value add at the core of the product.
Otherwise, this would be fine by me:
Title: Most common cause of Active Directory "failures"?
You want something done right, do it yourself
:)
-g
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 1:48
PMTo: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir]
Hmm... No, I disagree joe. Microsoft does need to worry about adoption of
their products and any barriers, real or imagined, to that adoption. *nix
integration is a reality. Get used to it. Be sure to take it into account
for future releases. Be sure to protect the investment of your developer
VMWare Workstation I think starting with 5.0 has a similar concept to
differencing disks. Usually these things endup in the GSX platform, it just
takes a while. ESX has a differencing disks type story, I forget what its
called, though.
Thanks,
Brian
Desmond
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
c -
thats because this addy has special needs.
its a journal contact that needs to be routed out a dedicated connector to a journal server.
i still don't understand why exchange rewrites the address to domain.com instead of servername.domain.com.
thanks
On 10/10/05, joe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
I've written that, and it's actually rather straightforward if you're
willing to tackle VBScript and ADSI.
Another option you might consider is Microsoft Virtual Server or VMware,
where you can build a VM with your environment, save it as a golden
master, and use it as the base when you need to
Title: Most common cause of Active Directory "failures"?
We usually do a big "State of the AD World" survey at DEC,
and certainly will again in Vegas (assuming there are some people left in the
room who haven't already headed out to the casino. :)
I needed some
answers sooner than later for
Not enough information.
Is this one of it's domains for whichthe Exchange
serverhas a recipient policy? That's the most likely
reason.
Can you tell us more about the
scenario?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom
KernSent: Monday, October 10, 2005 6:33
Title: Schema Updates
I think this is definitely a case where Moore's Law hasn't
been applicable. It's funny how little this story has changed since I saw
the first unified messaging demos (then by Octel) about ten years
ago.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVPFreelance E-Mail
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
