W2K3 Causing "Network Problems"?

Hi
First here's a fairly detailed description of my
environment -
I work for an institution with about 15,000 computers,
about 2/3 of which are Windows (mostly XP and 2K Pro and
NT4, 2K servers). The rest are mostly Macs and a couple
of hundred Linux workstations and various Unix servers.
We are still on NT4 Directory Services, which includes 3
account domains and several resource domains. The DNS
servers are UNIX (not Bind, but something else that I
can't remember the name of) and so is the DHCP server.
We also have 2 WINS servers. There are no real WAN
issues. The physical network is class B /23. I do not
work for central IT and often the communication from them
is atrocious. I recently saw a quote from an e-mail that
one of my colleagues was CC'd on directing an Admin in a
resource domain to downgrade the 2003 server that they
installed to Win 2000. They said something vague about
Win 2003 "doesn't play nice on our network". Huh???? I
thought I knew a reasonable amount about Win 2003. I
still think I do. Am I missing something here or is
someone sending out BS because they are feeling insecure
for not being familiar with the OS yet?
Thanks!

I haven't had problem using 2K3 with any other MS OS in either a DC or a
member environment.

"Annon E. Mouse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:772c01c3e870$3644b700$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi
> First here's a fairly detailed description of my
> environment -
> I work for an institution with about 15,000 computers,
> about 2/3 of which are Windows (mostly XP and 2K Pro and
> NT4, 2K servers). The rest are mostly Macs and a couple
> of hundred Linux workstations and various Unix servers.
> We are still on NT4 Directory Services, which includes 3
> account domains and several resource domains. The DNS
> servers are UNIX (not Bind, but something else that I
> can't remember the name of) and so is the DHCP server.
> We also have 2 WINS servers. There are no real WAN
> issues. The physical network is class B /23. I do not
> work for central IT and often the communication from them
> is atrocious. I recently saw a quote from an e-mail that
> one of my colleagues was CC'd on directing an Admin in a
> resource domain to downgrade the 2003 server that they
> installed to Win 2000. They said something vague about
> Win 2003 "doesn't play nice on our network". Huh???? I
> thought I knew a reasonable amount about Win 2003. I
> still think I do. Am I missing something here or is
> someone sending out BS because they are feeling insecure
> for not being familiar with the OS yet?
> Thanks!

>-----Original Message-----
>I haven't had problem using 2K3 with any other MS OS in
either a DC or a
>member environment.

Thanks, Rob. That's the kind of answer I probably can
expect to get from everyone. BTW - I checked and it's
only a member server, which is what I would expect of
course.

>
>"Annon E. Mouse" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote in message
>news:772c01c3e870$3644b700$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hi
>> First here's a fairly detailed description of my
>> environment -
>> I work for an institution with about 15,000 computers,
>> about 2/3 of which are Windows (mostly XP and 2K Pro
and
>> NT4, 2K servers). The rest are mostly Macs and a
couple
>> of hundred Linux workstations and various Unix servers.
>> We are still on NT4 Directory Services, which includes
3
>> account domains and several resource domains. The DNS
>> servers are UNIX (not Bind, but something else that I
>> can't remember the name of) and so is the DHCP server.
>> We also have 2 WINS servers. There are no real WAN
>> issues. The physical network is class B /23. I do not
>> work for central IT and often the communication from
them
>> is atrocious. I recently saw a quote from an e-mail
that
>> one of my colleagues was CC'd on directing an Admin in
a
>> resource domain to downgrade the 2003 server that they
>> installed to Win 2000. They said something vague about
>> Win 2003 "doesn't play nice on our network". Huh????
I
>> thought I knew a reasonable amount about Win 2003. I
>> still think I do. Am I missing something here or is
>> someone sending out BS because they are feeling
insecure
>> for not being familiar with the OS yet?
>> Thanks!
>
>
>.
>

What they were referring to probably related to security. W2k3 has a
higher level of security by default. For "downlevel" MS machines and non-MS
machines this can cause problems if you are not aware of it. Apart from
tighter password requirements it sets things like SMB signing on. Things can
be even tighter for a DC, through the default domain controller policy.

These can all be changed, of course.

"Annon E. Mouse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:7c1c01c3e883$1a6fa4f0$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >-----Original Message-----
> >I haven't had problem using 2K3 with any other MS OS in
> either a DC or a
> >member environment.
>
> Thanks, Rob. That's the kind of answer I probably can
> expect to get from everyone. BTW - I checked and it's
> only a member server, which is what I would expect of
> course.
>
> >
> >"Annon E. Mouse" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote in message
> >news:772c01c3e870$3644b700$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> Hi
> >> First here's a fairly detailed description of my
> >> environment -
> >> I work for an institution with about 15,000 computers,
> >> about 2/3 of which are Windows (mostly XP and 2K Pro
> and
> >> NT4, 2K servers). The rest are mostly Macs and a
> couple
> >> of hundred Linux workstations and various Unix servers.
> >> We are still on NT4 Directory Services, which includes
> 3
> >> account domains and several resource domains. The DNS
> >> servers are UNIX (not Bind, but something else that I
> >> can't remember the name of) and so is the DHCP server.
> >> We also have 2 WINS servers. There are no real WAN
> >> issues. The physical network is class B /23. I do not
> >> work for central IT and often the communication from
> them
> >> is atrocious. I recently saw a quote from an e-mail
> that
> >> one of my colleagues was CC'd on directing an Admin in
> a
> >> resource domain to downgrade the 2003 server that they
> >> installed to Win 2000. They said something vague about
> >> Win 2003 "doesn't play nice on our network". Huh????
> I
> >> thought I knew a reasonable amount about Win 2003. I
> >> still think I do. Am I missing something here or is
> >> someone sending out BS because they are feeling
> insecure
> >> for not being familiar with the OS yet?
> >> Thanks!
> >
> >
> >.
> >

Win2k3 by default uses Kerbios (if I spelled it right) underlying all
authentication. Older systems and non-MS systems may not be able to
deal with it properly.

--

Phillip Windell [CCNA, MVP, MCP]
WAND-TV (ABC Affiliate)
www.wandtv.com

"Annon E. Mouse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:7c1c01c3e883$1a6fa4f0$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >-----Original Message-----
> >I haven't had problem using 2K3 with any other MS OS in
> either a DC or a
> >member environment.
>
> Thanks, Rob. That's the kind of answer I probably can
> expect to get from everyone. BTW - I checked and it's
> only a member server, which is what I would expect of
> course.
>
> >
> >"Annon E. Mouse" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote in message
> >news:772c01c3e870$3644b700$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> Hi
> >> First here's a fairly detailed description of my
> >> environment -
> >> I work for an institution with about 15,000 computers,
> >> about 2/3 of which are Windows (mostly XP and 2K Pro
> and
> >> NT4, 2K servers). The rest are mostly Macs and a
> couple
> >> of hundred Linux workstations and various Unix servers.
> >> We are still on NT4 Directory Services, which includes
> 3
> >> account domains and several resource domains. The DNS
> >> servers are UNIX (not Bind, but something else that I
> >> can't remember the name of) and so is the DHCP server.
> >> We also have 2 WINS servers. There are no real WAN
> >> issues. The physical network is class B /23. I do not
> >> work for central IT and often the communication from
> them
> >> is atrocious. I recently saw a quote from an e-mail
> that
> >> one of my colleagues was CC'd on directing an Admin in
> a
> >> resource domain to downgrade the 2003 server that they
> >> installed to Win 2000. They said something vague about
> >> Win 2003 "doesn't play nice on our network". Huh????
> I
> >> thought I knew a reasonable amount about Win 2003. I
> >> still think I do. Am I missing something here or is
> >> someone sending out BS because they are feeling
> insecure
> >> for not being familiar with the OS yet?
> >> Thanks!
> >
> >
> >.
> >

This server was not installed as a DC, just a file server.
The SMB signing problem can be overcome by installing at
least SP3 or 4 on NT machines (there are only a few left
in the domain, all at SP6a, and no Win9x machines). This
W2K3 member server was able to JOIN an NT 4 domain, so
obviously this is not the problem they were talking about.
I think the real answer is that we were getting BS from
the people who didn't want to support it because of
incompetence.
>-----Original Message-----
> What they were referring to probably related to
security. W2k3 has a
>higher level of security by default. For "downlevel" MS
machines and non-MS
>machines this can cause problems if you are not aware of
it. Apart from
>tighter password requirements it sets things like SMB
signing on. Things can
>be even tighter for a DC, through the default domain
controller policy.
>
> These can all be changed, of course.
>
>"Annon E. Mouse" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote in message
>news:7c1c01c3e883$1a6fa4f0$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >I haven't had problem using 2K3 with any other MS OS
in
>> either a DC or a
>> >member environment.
>>
>> Thanks, Rob. That's the kind of answer I probably can
>> expect to get from everyone. BTW - I checked and it's
>> only a member server, which is what I would expect of
>> course.
>>
>> >
>> >"Annon E. Mouse" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote in message
>> >news:772c01c3e870$3644b700$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> Hi
>> >> First here's a fairly detailed description of my
>> >> environment -
>> >> I work for an institution with about 15,000
computers,
>> >> about 2/3 of which are Windows (mostly XP and 2K Pro
>> and
>> >> NT4, 2K servers). The rest are mostly Macs and a
>> couple
>> >> of hundred Linux workstations and various Unix
servers.
>> >> We are still on NT4 Directory Services, which
includes
>> 3
>> >> account domains and several resource domains. The
DNS
>> >> servers are UNIX (not Bind, but something else that
I
>> >> can't remember the name of) and so is the DHCP
server.
>> >> We also have 2 WINS servers. There are no real WAN
>> >> issues. The physical network is class B /23. I do
not
>> >> work for central IT and often the communication from
>> them
>> >> is atrocious. I recently saw a quote from an e-mail
>> that
>> >> one of my colleagues was CC'd on directing an Admin
in
>> a
>> >> resource domain to downgrade the 2003 server that
they
>> >> installed to Win 2000. They said something vague
about
>> >> Win 2003 "doesn't play nice on our network".
Huh????
>> I
>> >> thought I knew a reasonable amount about Win 2003.
I
>> >> still think I do. Am I missing something here or is
>> >> someone sending out BS because they are feeling
>> insecure
>> >> for not being familiar with the OS yet?
>> >> Thanks!
>> >
>> >
>> >.
>> >
>
>
>.
>