Active Directory Sites

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Would there ever be a reason to create a Site that doesn't include at least 1
DC? If so, why?
 
sites are needed when the location represented by a site contains site aware
services.
Examples of site aware services are:
* DCs/GCs
* DFS

If no site aware services are present then just add the subnets to the
nearest site with site aware services

--

Cheers,
(HOPEFULLY THIS INFORMATION HELPS YOU!)

# Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services

BLOG (WEB-BASED)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx
BLOG (RSS-FEEDS)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/rss.aspx
 
Bryan Erwin said:
Would there ever be a reason to create a Site that doesn't include at
least 1
DC? If so, why?
Click to expand...

Seldom is this NECESSARY but as Jorge said when you have
site aware "clients & services" then it might make sense. There
are few of these except for AD Authentication etc.

(DFS, possibly SMS, and a very few others.)

Possibly future plans to add DCs but that is just an extension of
"having a DC" there.
 
"Jorge de Almeida Pinto [MVP - DS]"
and do not forget...

Exchange 2007 which now uses AD sites (although I do expect that where
Exchange is found, you will also find DC)
Click to expand...

Good point -- I keep forgetting this since the CLIENTS
are not yet site aware.
 
Unless your mailbox data is replicated across your organization it wouldn't
make sense for the clients to be site aware in the context of Exchange...

--
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
Windows Server MVP - Directory Services

www.briandesmond.com


Herb Martin said:
"Jorge de Almeida Pinto [MVP - DS]"
and do not forget...

Exchange 2007 which now uses AD sites (although I do expect that where
Exchange is found, you will also find DC)
Click to expand...

Good point -- I keep forgetting this since the CLIENTS
are not yet site aware.
Click to expand...
 
Brian Desmond said:
Unless your mailbox data is replicated across your organization it
wouldn't make sense for the clients to be site aware in the context of
Exchange...
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't it make sense for OUTBOUND email?

If a client (laptop) moves from an office in LA to an office in NYCity,
wouldn't it be better if all outbound email went through the nearest
"site specific" server?

Certainly would help with plain old SMTP if we had that.
 
In
Herb Martin said:
Why wouldn't it make sense for OUTBOUND email?

If a client (laptop) moves from an office in LA to an office in
NYCity, wouldn't it be better if all outbound email went through the
nearest "site specific" server?

Certainly would help with plain old SMTP if we had that.
Click to expand...

I believe Brian is referring to Outlook/Exchange mailbox communication. As
far as outbound SMTP traffic with Exchange, I would imagine that would
depend on how the Exchange infrastructure is designed and configured,
meaning whether each and every server sends out mail to the internet, or if
the organization has a specific Exchange server that all outbound SMTP
traffic is routed to, to send out mail.

--
Regards,
Ace

This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties or guarantees and
confers no rights.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2003 & 2000, MCSA 2003 & 2000, MCSE+I, MCT, MVP
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
Microsoft Certified Trainer

Infinite Diversities in Infinite Combinations

Having difficulty reading or finding responses to your post?
Instead of the website you're using, try using OEx (Outlook Express
or any other newsreader), and configure a news account, pointing to
news.microsoft.com. Anonymous access. It's free - no username or password
required nor do you need a Newsgroup Usenet account with your ISP. It
connects directly to the Microsoft Public Newsgroups. OEx allows you
o easily find, track threads, cross-post, sort by date, poster's name,
watched threads or subject. It's easy:

How to Configure OEx for Internet News
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=171164

"Quitting smoking is easy. I've done it a thousand times." - Mark Twain
 
Ace Fekay said:
In

I believe Brian is referring to Outlook/Exchange mailbox communication. As
far as outbound SMTP traffic with Exchange, I would imagine that would
depend on how the Exchange infrastructure is designed and configured,
meaning whether each and every server sends out mail to the internet, or
if the organization has a specific Exchange server that all outbound SMTP
traffic is routed to, to send out mail.
Click to expand...

I am talking about distributed networks where people in different sites
would currently be set manually to use a local server; for these the
idea of having outbound email START its trip from the move favorable
local server would be a good motivation for making email CLIENTS
"site aware".

This could actually be done now -- with all of the site specific records
still requiring manual entry at first.
 
In
Herb Martin said:
I am talking about distributed networks where people in different
sites would currently be set manually to use a local server; for
these the idea of having outbound email START its trip from the move
favorable local server would be a good motivation for making email
CLIENTS "site aware".

This could actually be done now -- with all of the site specific
records still requiring manual entry at first.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying now. I guess that's one way to do it.

Ace
 
Exchange does not use SMTP for user mail submission. Exchange 2007 uses AD
site topology for SMTP routing between sites, but thats server-server
traffic, not client-server.

--
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
Windows Server MVP - Directory Services

www.briandesmond.com
 
Businesses that use Exchange don't tend to have Outlook configured to
use SMTP though, it s all RPC based and involves a direct connection to
the mailbox. Going to SMTP would likely defeat outbound message send
blocking on over quota accounts and server side outbound rules. I would
have to think about it for a while but I expect there would be other
repercussions.

I guess having a distributed mailbox like that might be interesting but
I just can't visualize how you could get it to scale without serious AI
type coding to work out the details and serious over capacity on most
servers to handle the swing in loads as people moved about.

Even bringing GAL lookups to local DCs is generally not a good idea due
to latency in the updates, it is entirely possible that the Exchange
Server DC and the local DC the user is using have entirely different
views on the GAL and could have for some time in some orgs. This could
result in undeliverable mail as well as other issues.

Exchange in large orgs is a beast, the more you can reduce latency
between the GAL viewpoints of different machines, the better. If you
have ever dealt in a large environment with multiple RUS instances
(common in large orgs) then you will totally understand what I am
talking about. I am even more concerned, at least on the surface, with
E12 because of that and will remain so until I get a chance to really
dig into the guts of how it is working. They killed the RUS and replaced
it with the client admin software setting all of the values, there was
tremendous duplicate value possibilities just in using a couple of
RUSes, imagine the possible issues with hundreds of clients setting
values instead unless they changed how the whole naming system worked
under the covers with LEDNs and mailnicknames.


--
Joe Richards Microsoft MVP Windows Server Directory Services
Author of O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition
www.joeware.net


---O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition now available---

http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm
 
Back
Top