We are preparing to replace our two Win2k domain controllers soon, and would prefer to go to 2003 R2. In researching the best migration path for our network, I found a Microsoft article that said it was better to migrate from 2000 to 2003, and then 2003 to 2003 R2, but it gave little reason why, other than for a fast roll-back if everything goes belly up. Other than and easy roll-back, is there a reason that it would be a problem to go straight to R2? I've done some follow up research on that question, and I'm just not finding a lot of information out there about it.
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations John Tel on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Upgrading 2000 domain to 2003 R2
- Thread starter FloDiggs
- Start date
I went from 2000 to 2003R2, no troubles. You do have to run the domain and forest preps using the 2nd R2 CD is all.
Are you running Exchange 2000 by any chance? There's a step you have to perform to prevent an incident from occuring if you do.
I'm Certifiable, not cert-ified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.
Are you running Exchange 2000 by any chance? There's a step you have to perform to prevent an incident from occuring if you do.
I'm Certifiable, not cert-ified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.
- Thread starter
- #3
We have Exchange 2003 on a Win2k box, so it should be OK. Since we are completely replacing the 2k DCs, we should be able to run the new 2003 R2 servers parallel to the 2k server in 2k mode, and then raise the functionality level after we transfer all the roles and demote our two current DCs.
- Status
Similar threads
