Domain Controller replacement 2

[nhidalgo]

Our setup.
1 2000 root domain, 3 domain controllers all 2000
25 child 2000 domains 1 controller each
Exchange 2000 in root domain
2 2000 terminal servers in root domain.

I would like to install a 2003 server DC to replace 1 of my domain controllers in the root domain. Will this have any effect on my child domains, exchange, terminal server licensing or anything else i am not thinking of.

Thanks
Nick

 

[markdmac]

No, but you will need to update the Schema on forest and the root domain first.

ADPREP /FORESTPREP
ADPREP /DOMAINPREP

I hope you find this post helpful.

Regards,

Mark

 

[SWarrior]

Here is another thing that you probobly forgot about. Since you are going to put a 2k3 DC into your root, you now need 2k3 CAL's for EVERY machine. Personally, If you need to just replace the server, I'd downgrade the license and use it as a 2k DC. your 2k cals will not work to connect to the 2k3 server, and since this 2k3 server is going to be a DC, then every client will need to have BOTH 2k cal's and 2k3 cal's.

You can thank Microsoft for that one.

-SWarrior

 

[markdmac]

XP Pro comes with a 2K3 server cal. Downgrading should only be used as a last resort. Windows 2000 is past normal lifecycle support.

I'm interested to know what you mean by

your 2k cals will not work to connect to the 2k3 server

Whether you have purchased CALS or not, the server won't deny you entry. You can even turn of the license service since MS is doing away with that anyway. You just need to be able to prove you have paid for what you use.

Are you maybe thinking about Terminal Services which is a totally different situation?

I hope you find this post helpful.

Regards,

Mark

 

[nhidalgo]

Thanks for the replies, I have decided to just stick with 2000 for now. Running the addprep could cause some problems with exchange 2000 acording to microsoft.

Nick

 

[markdmac]

Regarding Exchange, all you really need to be concerned with is that Exchange 2003 is the only version of Exchange that can run on Windows 2003. You can still have a Windows 2000 Server running Exchange 2000 in a Windows 2003 domain where all other servers are Windows 2003.

You can also upgrade the Exchange to 2003 and still have that run on a Windows 2000 server. You just can't have E2k on Win2k3.

I hope you find this post helpful.

Regards,

Mark

 

[SWarrior]

marcdmac,

XP Pro comes with a 2K3 server cal. Downgrading should only be used as a last resort. Windows 2000 is past normal lifecycle support.

That is incorrect information. Only XP Pro that was purchased prior to 4-24-2003 came with a "Complimentary" 2k3 Terminal Services CAL.

Here are the facts that even I was misinformed on DIRECTLY from Microsoft themselves.

1. Win2k PRO & WinXP Pro do NOT need TS CAL's when connecting to a 2k Terminal Server. They still DO need the normal 2k CAL to connect to any other server.

2. Both Win2k Pro & WinXP need TS CAL's when connecting to a 2k3 Terminal Server. You must purchase 2k3 cals as USER or DEVICE. I'm finding out that user cals are most likely prefered as if you have a user that has a PC and a laptop, they can connect from BOTH locations at the same time without violating license (example. user forget's to log off his work pc and needs to connect from his laptop).

3. If you're using 2k Terminal server, and you need cal's and can't find them? You must purchase the 2k3 TS DEVICE cals and then downgrade them to 2k through MS Clearing House (free phone call).

Remember that if you have PC's that already have Win2k PRO or WinXP PRO installed on them, you do NOT need TS CAL's if you are connecting to Win 2000 Terminal Server!!!

 

[markdmac]

I've been told that the program which you are correct had expired was in fact reinstated. It is all however neither hear nor there. Licensing is as it is and I'll leave that up to the license experts. What can't be dismissed however is that Windows 2000 is no longer supported.

Win2K went out of mainstream support June 30th of this year. The time has come to upgrade.



I hope you find this post helpful.

Regards,

Mark