"Eric" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:6BE89113-76E8-479F-9BF7-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Well, we were hoping that a sniffer would show a lot of traffic coming
> from a
> device or system. Isn't that what a sniffer does?
It ain't that simple. You would have to define what a "lot of traffic"
actually is and that is always relative to the Bandwidth and the Throughput
of the particular path it is taking at the particular moment it is taking
it,..all in repect to the amount of other traffic happing on the same path
at the same time. It is just a bunch of fuzzy math and voodoo,...mostly
voodoo. It is just easier to look at the way things are designed and
configured,....and then design and configure them more correctly. In my 10
years of doing this I think I have only touched a "sniffer" for any real
usefull purpose maybe 2 times,..the rest of the time I was just playing. A
sniffer is usually only *barely* useful on a fully switched LAN anyway,
hardly anyone uses hubs anymore and the wide use of sniffers has dwindled
along with the use of hubs. I'm not saying they can't be useful, I just
saying things are different now-a-days.
> I can believe that it be the WAN and AD design. The people that set
> everything up said here you go. We do not have anyone on staff that is
> proficient with AD and we can not get approval to have someone come it to
> fix
> the design. Wishing for a miracle program that will scan the network and
> give us a report that shows the problems are and how to fix them.
There is no miracle program. The "era" of Star Trek has not begun. If you
have no one that knows this stuff well enough to describe how your system is
put together, or worse, no one who knows enough to follow suggestions to
correct it,...then they are just going to have to hire someone or have the
people who installed it come back and look over what they have done to see
if there are problems. The later would probably be my first step,..they set
it up, they know what is there better than anyone else.
Anyway, all babbling aside,..this documentation may be usefull to you. It
says Windows2000, but AD is still AD, the main principles have not really
changed. If someone has similar material for 2003 feel welcomed to post it.:
Windows 2000 Server Active Directory Planning and Deployment Guides
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../cc879068.aspx
As far as your WAN itself, one of the big mistakes people make is not
considering the use of "home-user" line technologies (DSL, CableTV). These
are asyncromous connections with a slower upload speed than what the
download speed runs at. With VPN technology the download speed of the
connection doesn't mean "squat",...it is the slower upload speed that
matters and so you will only go as fast as the slow upload speed goes. This
may often not be fast enough to run Ad Replication along with "thick
client" applications,..and certainly not File Serving/Sharing. The File
Serving/Sharing also effects email if the Site doesn't have a local Mail
Server because the user's emails have to pull possibly large file
attachments over the link which is really no different than pulling a file
from a File Share. So each site obviously needs at least one DC and their
own Mail Server in many cases.
--
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.
-----------------------------------------------------
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
