Migrate from SBS 2003

[CElliott]

We currently have a SBS 2003 Server and wish to shut it down and install Server 2003 Standard R2 on it. We have both Exchange, SQL, and SharePoint running on seperate servers within our network at this time. We never used SQL on SBS and we migrated Exchange to another server last month. The SBS 2003 Server is currently the Domain Controller as it has to be so it of course has Active Directory and is also running DNS, Print Server and DHCP.

We already have licensing for Server 2003 R2 and do not want to go down the expensive Microsoft transition pack road. My question is what is the best method to get Active Directory moved over if possible to the 2003 R2 Server? We will be naming the 2003 R2 Server the same name as the old SBS 2003 Server and use the same IP address also. We can shut down the entire network for a period of time to reformat the hard drive on the SBS 2003 Server and install Server 2003 R2 on the same piece of hardware.

Any help with this situation would be appreciated. If I would have know how restrictive SBS was going to be we would have never purchased it 2 years ago.

Thanks in advance.

Craig

 

[LWComputingMVP]

I don't know how you think the transition pack is expensive. It was priced so that you would just be paying the difference for the products had you bought them all seperately. You've spent more on new Client Access Licenses, Exchange, SQL, and Windows then you would have had you just bought the transition pack.

As it stands, I would recommend you setup another machine and as a Domain Controller in the SBS domain. Turn off the SBS server and then seize the FSMO roles on that DC.

What "restrictions" are you referring to - how is SBS creating a problem for you now?

 

[CElliott]

Thanks for the information to migrate the DC, it is greatly appreciated.

At this time, yes it would be more expensive for us to purchase the transition pack. We already had an SQL server in place before SBS and we were already using Server 2003 CALS. We have been able to purchase Exchange 2003 and Server 2003 Standard for a substantial amount under the transition pack. It is a unique situation and like I said we should have probably not went with SBS in the first place.

Thanks again for the recommendation.

 

[58sniper]

The transition pack is still the easiest way to do it.

You don't mention the need to get away from SBS. I suspect it's only to get around the 75 user limit.

If you kill the SBS box, reload it, and bring it online, how are you going to get Exchange to connect to it? At that point, you're toast (assuming the SBS box is the only DC and GC).

Pat Richard, MCSE(2) MCSA:Messaging, CNA(2)
Want to know how email works? Read for yourself -

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt

 

[CElliott]

The reason for getting away from SBS 2003 was that Exchange was bogging down the entire SBS Server and we want to seperate all of the servers on seperate pieces of hardware.

We have already built a seperate Exchange server and have it in production after migrating all of the mailboxes.

Paying $3,500 for the transition pack just wasn't feasible. We are in no hurry to shut down the SBS Server so we will be testing the migrating process to Server 2003 Standard.

 

[LWComputingMVP]

You sure Exchange was bogging down the server? I've seen exchange servers running on 800 MHz systems with 300+ users on them and not come close to using the CPU.

How do you figure you saved money? Exchange is $1100, SQL is $1570, and even the OEM version of 2003 with 5 CALs is $900... 1100+1570+900 = 3570. And that's not even including ALL the CALs you need. Unless of course, you are not licensed appropriately.

I wouldn't be trying to do what you are doing... I'm be looking at server performance - upgrading/adding a CPU and/or RAM. I have a 2yr old SBS server serving 10 clients and a 6 year old server running SBS handling 10 clients and Exchange is not a problem on either - Volume Shadow Copy spikes the processor ussage, but that's it... And I'll be upgrading the Celeron 2.4 to at least a P4 2.8 with HT in a couple of months. I really think you're looking at this from the wrong perspective.

 

[58sniper]

Yep - I've got a client running SBS 2003 on a 3 year old box. They have 60GB of email, a dozen printers, SQL managing 750 Million dollars of financial portfolios, a unified messaging solution (dumps faxing and voicemail into Exchange), Sharepoint, mobile access, and a dozen other apps. Single processor, 2GB of RAM. Runs like a champ, and hasn't been rebooted since the last service pack was installed.

I second lwcomputing's concerns. The licensing and software costs alone to separate Exchange from SBS (not to mention the soft cost of the labor) would certainly make me think twice.

Pat Richard, MCSE(2) MCSA:Messaging, CNA(2)
Want to know how email works? Read for yourself -

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt