2 Domain Controllers and Exchange

We have a small windows network that was upgraded to Windows 2003. I though
that with this setup both of the domain controllers would be peers and not a
Primary and Seconday as it was in Windows 2000.

If one of the domain controllers is down the clients have trouble logging in
and Exchange will lock up until that server is restored. Any ideas why this
should be like this?

Hello Bill,

Check that both DC's are Global catalog servers and best is to install DNS
on both DC's as Active directory integrated zones. Also you have to configure
the clients to use both DNS servers.

Best regards

Meinolf Weber
Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no rights.

> We have a small windows network that was upgraded to Windows 2003. I
> though that with this setup both of the domain controllers would be
> peers and not a Primary and Seconday as it was in Windows 2000.
>
> If one of the domain controllers is down the clients have trouble
> logging in and Exchange will lock up until that server is restored.
> Any ideas why this should be like this?
>

"Bill Cart" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> We have a small windows network that was upgraded to Windows 2003. I
> though that with this setup both of the domain controllers would be peers
> and not a Primary and Seconday as it was in Windows 2000.
>
> If one of the domain controllers is down the clients have trouble logging
> in and Exchange will lock up until that server is restored. Any ideas why
> this should be like this?

There was not Primary and Secondary with 2000 either. 2000 and 2003 are the
same,..it was NT4 that was different. There is no PDC/BDC since
Windows2000,...NT4 was the last one. There is a PDC "role" but it is not
quite the same thing.

Exchange requries the Global Catalog component on an accessable DC. You can
make both a GC but I have heard that can cause problems too in some cases.
Our Corp HQ for example request that we *not* make both a GC at the other
offices (Child Domains).

Having two DCs does not mean that losing one DC won't cause the LAN
Problems,...it *will* cause the LAN problems. There are FSMO Roles, and the
PDC "role" (not the same as the old PDC) that can not be duplicated across
DCs,...so losing a DC loses those "roles" until it is fixed. Also Clients
will always try to contact the same DC they contacted the last time, if they
fail they may not transition smoothly to the other one.

The main benefit of having more than one DC it that you don't lose your
Active Directory Database of you loose a DC. The remaining DC can have all
the "roles" moved over to it (a manual process) and you can continue.

--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------

Hello Bill,

Here some infos about the 5 FSMO roles and placement and also about the Global
catalog
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/223346

http://technet2.microsoft.com/window....mspx?mfr=true

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../bb124454.aspx

http://searchexchange.techtarget.com...198919,00.html


Best regards

Meinolf Weber
Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no rights.

> We have a small windows network that was upgraded to Windows 2003. I
> though that with this setup both of the domain controllers would be
> peers and not a Primary and Seconday as it was in Windows 2000.
>
> If one of the domain controllers is down the clients have trouble
> logging in and Exchange will lock up until that server is restored.
> Any ideas why this should be like this?
>

And the answer was "Global Catalog Server". I went to the 2nt domain
controller and checked the box and now it works as we want. Thanks all!!

I should point out that it works OK for us as we only have the one domain
(at least for now). It seems like it gets a lot more complicated it you have
more domains but for us part time network guys we like to keep it simple.

"Bill Cart" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> We have a small windows network that was upgraded to Windows 2003. I
> though that with this setup both of the domain controllers would be peers
> and not a Primary and Seconday as it was in Windows 2000.
>
> If one of the domain controllers is down the clients have trouble logging
> in and Exchange will lock up until that server is restored. Any ideas why
> this should be like this?
>

The single Domain is MS's prefered model since Windows2000/Active Directory
came out. The "flat" multi-domain model of NT4.0 is no longer considered
the correct approach.


--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------

"Bill Cart" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%23chpEf$(E-Mail Removed)...
> And the answer was "Global Catalog Server". I went to the 2nt domain
> controller and checked the box and now it works as we want. Thanks all!!
>
> I should point out that it works OK for us as we only have the one domain
> (at least for now). It seems like it gets a lot more complicated it you
> have more domains but for us part time network guys we like to keep it
> simple.
>
> "Bill Cart" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> We have a small windows network that was upgraded to Windows 2003. I
>> though that with this setup both of the domain controllers would be peers
>> and not a Primary and Seconday as it was in Windows 2000.
>>
>> If one of the domain controllers is down the clients have trouble logging
>> in and Exchange will lock up until that server is restored. Any ideas why
>> this should be like this?
>>
>
>