Prev: SBS2008-vista : connection lost after 10 hours
Next: Memory and C: drive maxing out
From: Jarryd on 14 May 2010 06:03
Hi Cliff,

I wrote a super long explanation for you (it involved the host being the Sym
BE 2010 backup server and credential issues), and then decided to try doing
this a bit differently which would allow me to run the host in a workgroup.
It worked. So I guess I don't need to join the host to the domain. Is it
still not better to have a DC on a separate physical box, i.e. outside the
virtual environment? I know that clients cache credentials, but I dunno, I
guess perhaps I am just old fashioned but I would have thought it was a good
idea. I am not sure about disaster recovery. That wasn't really part of my
concern. Do people not really worry about this much anymore, at least in
smaller domains.

TIA,

Jarryd

"Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:EAE1BEBE-4E93-4DD4-8381-A368C0F102B1(a)microsoft.com...
> I'm far more curious why you've decided you must join the host to the
> domain.


From: Cliff Galiher - MVP on 14 May 2010 07:38
In small domains, or more importantly in small IT shops where time and
financial resources are often constrained, I am of the opinion that multiple
domain controllers add far more complexity than the problems they solve.
You have to start concerning yourself with replication, for more detailed
monitoring of your AD health, and multiple DCs does make disaster recovery
down the road far more complex. Even *testing* your DR becomes more
laborious.

Are there benefits? Yes. Do they outweigh the costs? In most cases I'd
argue not.

-Cliff


"Jarryd" <jarryd(a)nodomain.com> wrote in message
news:OTirwy08KHA.4648(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Hi Cliff,
>
> I wrote a super long explanation for you (it involved the host being the
> Sym BE 2010 backup server and credential issues), and then decided to try
> doing this a bit differently which would allow me to run the host in a
> workgroup. It worked. So I guess I don't need to join the host to the
> domain. Is it still not better to have a DC on a separate physical box,
> i.e. outside the virtual environment? I know that clients cache
> credentials, but I dunno, I guess perhaps I am just old fashioned but I
> would have thought it was a good idea. I am not sure about disaster
> recovery. That wasn't really part of my concern. Do people not really
> worry about this much anymore, at least in smaller domains.
>
> TIA,
>
> Jarryd
>
> "Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:EAE1BEBE-4E93-4DD4-8381-A368C0F102B1(a)microsoft.com...
>> I'm far more curious why you've decided you must join the host to the
>> domain.
>
>
From: Jarryd on 14 May 2010 11:13
Fair enough Cliff. I like it simple, so I'll give it a go. I can always
install one later if I find I am getting trouble.

Cheers,

Jarryd

"Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:482F4C8B-01D9-4471-B153-0FFE83CC9FF5(a)microsoft.com...
> In small domains, or more importantly in small IT shops where time and
> financial resources are often constrained, I am of the opinion that
> multiple domain controllers add far more complexity than the problems they
> solve. You have to start concerning yourself with replication, for more
> detailed monitoring of your AD health, and multiple DCs does make disaster
> recovery down the road far more complex. Even *testing* your DR becomes
> more laborious.
>
> Are there benefits? Yes. Do they outweigh the costs? In most cases I'd
> argue not.
>
> -Cliff
>
>
> "Jarryd" <jarryd(a)nodomain.com> wrote in message
> news:OTirwy08KHA.4648(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Hi Cliff,
>>
>> I wrote a super long explanation for you (it involved the host being the
>> Sym BE 2010 backup server and credential issues), and then decided to try
>> doing this a bit differently which would allow me to run the host in a
>> workgroup. It worked. So I guess I don't need to join the host to the
>> domain. Is it still not better to have a DC on a separate physical box,
>> i.e. outside the virtual environment? I know that clients cache
>> credentials, but I dunno, I guess perhaps I am just old fashioned but I
>> would have thought it was a good idea. I am not sure about disaster
>> recovery. That wasn't really part of my concern. Do people not really
>> worry about this much anymore, at least in smaller domains.
>>
>> TIA,
>>
>> Jarryd
>>
>> "Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:EAE1BEBE-4E93-4DD4-8381-A368C0F102B1(a)microsoft.com...
>>> I'm far more curious why you've decided you must join the host to the
>>> domain.
>>
>>
From: Charlie Russel - MVP on 14 May 2010 19:43
I'm in complete agreement here with Cliff. Which is why I replied as I did
in the first place. There is no compelling reason to have the hyper-v host
in the domain, since its ONLY function is to be the hyper-v parent. Nothing
else should run on it. Given that, it can be in a workgroup without issue.
And the recovery process is actually simpler without a second DC. (Oh, and
to answer an earlier question, 2008R2 behaves just fine in a 2008 domain,
either as a DC or standalone server.)

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/russel




"Jarryd" <jarryd(a)nodomain.com> wrote in message
news:B8BC8E98-0735-4922-9FC9-DF1C18269EF7(a)microsoft.com...
> Fair enough Cliff. I like it simple, so I'll give it a go. I can always
> install one later if I find I am getting trouble.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jarryd
>
> "Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:482F4C8B-01D9-4471-B153-0FFE83CC9FF5(a)microsoft.com...
>> In small domains, or more importantly in small IT shops where time and
>> financial resources are often constrained, I am of the opinion that
>> multiple domain controllers add far more complexity than the problems
>> they solve. You have to start concerning yourself with replication, for
>> more detailed monitoring of your AD health, and multiple DCs does make
>> disaster recovery down the road far more complex. Even *testing* your DR
>> becomes more laborious.
>>
>> Are there benefits? Yes. Do they outweigh the costs? In most cases I'd
>> argue not.
>>
>> -Cliff
>>
>>
>> "Jarryd" <jarryd(a)nodomain.com> wrote in message
>> news:OTirwy08KHA.4648(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> Hi Cliff,
>>>
>>> I wrote a super long explanation for you (it involved the host being the
>>> Sym BE 2010 backup server and credential issues), and then decided to
>>> try doing this a bit differently which would allow me to run the host in
>>> a workgroup. It worked. So I guess I don't need to join the host to the
>>> domain. Is it still not better to have a DC on a separate physical box,
>>> i.e. outside the virtual environment? I know that clients cache
>>> credentials, but I dunno, I guess perhaps I am just old fashioned but I
>>> would have thought it was a good idea. I am not sure about disaster
>>> recovery. That wasn't really part of my concern. Do people not really
>>> worry about this much anymore, at least in smaller domains.
>>>
>>> TIA,
>>>
>>> Jarryd
>>>
>>> "Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:EAE1BEBE-4E93-4DD4-8381-A368C0F102B1(a)microsoft.com...
>>>> I'm far more curious why you've decided you must join the host to the
>>>> domain.
>>>
>>>

From: Jarryd on 17 May 2010 04:45
Thanks Charlie and Cliff.

Cheers,

Jarryd

"Charlie Russel - MVP" <Charlie(a)mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message
news:#pVD6878KHA.3276(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I'm in complete agreement here with Cliff. Which is why I replied as I did
> in the first place. There is no compelling reason to have the hyper-v host
> in the domain, since its ONLY function is to be the hyper-v parent.
> Nothing else should run on it. Given that, it can be in a workgroup
> without issue. And the recovery process is actually simpler without a
> second DC. (Oh, and to answer an earlier question, 2008R2 behaves just
> fine in a 2008 domain, either as a DC or standalone server.)
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/russel
>
>
>
>
> "Jarryd" <jarryd(a)nodomain.com> wrote in message
> news:B8BC8E98-0735-4922-9FC9-DF1C18269EF7(a)microsoft.com...
>> Fair enough Cliff. I like it simple, so I'll give it a go. I can always
>> install one later if I find I am getting trouble.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Jarryd
>>
>> "Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:482F4C8B-01D9-4471-B153-0FFE83CC9FF5(a)microsoft.com...
>>> In small domains, or more importantly in small IT shops where time and
>>> financial resources are often constrained, I am of the opinion that
>>> multiple domain controllers add far more complexity than the problems
>>> they solve. You have to start concerning yourself with replication, for
>>> more detailed monitoring of your AD health, and multiple DCs does make
>>> disaster recovery down the road far more complex. Even *testing* your
>>> DR becomes more laborious.
>>>
>>> Are there benefits? Yes. Do they outweigh the costs? In most cases
>>> I'd argue not.
>>>
>>> -Cliff
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jarryd" <jarryd(a)nodomain.com> wrote in message
>>> news:OTirwy08KHA.4648(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>> Hi Cliff,
>>>>
>>>> I wrote a super long explanation for you (it involved the host being
>>>> the Sym BE 2010 backup server and credential issues), and then decided
>>>> to try doing this a bit differently which would allow me to run the
>>>> host in a workgroup. It worked. So I guess I don't need to join the
>>>> host to the domain. Is it still not better to have a DC on a separate
>>>> physical box, i.e. outside the virtual environment? I know that
>>>> clients cache credentials, but I dunno, I guess perhaps I am just old
>>>> fashioned but I would have thought it was a good idea. I am not sure
>>>> about disaster recovery. That wasn't really part of my concern. Do
>>>> people not really worry about this much anymore, at least in smaller
>>>> domains.
>>>>
>>>> TIA,
>>>>
>>>> Jarryd
>>>>
>>>> "Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:EAE1BEBE-4E93-4DD4-8381-A368C0F102B1(a)microsoft.com...
>>>>> I'm far more curious why you've decided you must join the host to the
>>>>> domain.
>>>>
>>>>
>
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: SBS2008-vista : connection lost after 10 hours
Next: Memory and C: drive maxing out