clutch

Overclocking? Try dropping back to the stock speed; Linux can be a bit fussy when RAM timings and/or CPU settings are too aggressive. I have had several CPUs that would overclock just fine with Windows, but have apps, X, or the whole OS just bomb.

Get it working? If not, PM me and I'll come back to this. The basic premise is that you have two parts of a GPO, machine and user, and these parts will apply to the corresponding objects in your OU (you can apply GPO/security policy settings to Local, Site, Domain, or OU only but you can use security settings and WMI filters to limit this even further). If you have a "Users" OU that has only user objects in it, then only the user portion of the GPO will be used (such as IE restrictions or folder redirection). If you have a "Computers" OU with only computer objects in it then only the computer portion will be applied (such as assigning software installation or most of the core security settings).

If either of you are still having this issue, please come back and let us know. It sounds like a "split horizon" or "split brain" DNS issue that might be leading to resolution problems with the single target domain.

If it's any help, Vista requires even less reboots than XP ever did. If you tested Vista before, but haven't run the RTM, don't let your impressions of the alphas, betas, or RCs keep you from running it. I have found that the long term uptime of it, and using things standby and hibernate, are fantastic. It also seems to recover memory much more aggressively than the older OS versions do.

Yep, you could use the local accounts to act as a local user. Cruising around as a domain admin all the time isn't the best way to do business anyway. If you're logged on as a domain admin, or using a local account with the same name and password of one that exists on the destination box, then you will be transparently passed through if the account has access to the resource. An ideal situation would be to use Group Policy to push a domain local group into the local admins group of each system, and to use an account from that group (but that is probably a bit beyond scope for this).

I figured I should clarify why this didn't work. Using username@domain defaults to Kerberos, and if you are not attempting to access a 2000/2003 domain, or Kerberos realm resource it won't work. Since you are using systems in workgroup mode, there is no need to use the username@domain format.

Does the path, including the share, have more than 255 characters in it? That's pretty easy see when using really long filenames in music files (artist - album - trackname - track#.mp3).

Um, I bought another SCSI to IDE adapter for my ESX test box and 2GB of RAM.

Did you get this figured out?

Well, this is probably way too late, but might help others. If using Windows Server 2003, you setup your first DC, as you did, and install DNS (AD Integrated, secure updates only would be recommended), as you did. Have that DNS server point to itself, and only itself for DNS in the local NIC TCP/IP properties. When you bring up your next box, have it point to that server for DNS usage. Promote it, reboot, then install DNS on it. It will then show you all the records that the first DC/DNS server had. At this point, you may change the primary DNS server IP on the new DC to point to itself, and set the secondary DNS IP to the first DC. You may also add the new DC as the second DNS server IP on the first DC.

Do you have the VPC virtual machine setup to use a "virtual switch", or is it setup for NAT? These are networking options, and using NAT would let you go places, but not let you host anything. Also, if you are using OSX 10.4, you might have issues with VPC since the updated networking APIs break some apps.

Cool, the zombie mod gets to post on the zombie thread. This forum looks familiar, but I just can't place it...

I am under the assumption that both domains are on the same subnet. You could just setup the two WINS servers to replicate with one another in each domain to speed up resolution, but I would just use \\machinename\share to get what I need.

What peterh said, for the most part. Just note that it is the AD Client for NT, and not "ADSI" in case you are looking for that. Also, I thought that the clients were on the Server 2003 CD, but I can't remember right now.

Now if the search function would work better, or at least sort by most recent posts first...

In the DNS console, right click on the server name and click "Properties". In there, click on the "Forwarders" tab and enter the IPs of your ISP's DNS servers. Then, make sure that the server, and all other systems in the same domain as this server, are only pointed to this server for their DNS (your personal DNS box that is). This way, they all ask your DNS server for address info, and that server will use the forwarder to get info on domains that it doesn't host locally.

Basically, you setup DNS to accept dynamic updates, and you probably have it setup to do secure only (this is assuming that you configured it to accept dynamic updates to begin with). I am really tired right now and can't go into detail, but you *might* try using "secure and unsecure" updates and see what happens. Now, DHCP *should* be acting on the client's behalf when it isn't AD aware and registering the records, but there could be an issue elsewhere.

OK, so I have decided to keep track of all the nifty little tweaks and fixes in AD, DNS, and virtualization that I come across. I am doing that via a blog over here: http://www.msmvps.com/dns/ Since I have started doing this, I was wondering if anybody else here is blogging.

Originally posted by dosfreak: Quote: I guess it's just a way for people to create their own personal pages with interests and then have people discuss the topic of the day? Bingo. Blogs have been really handy from programmers in the past. When googling an issue in C#, I have happened across blogs that either included the problem and a solution, or included the problem but a person commenting had the solution. I figured I would do the same thing with AD/DNS and virtualization, and eventually get back into programming and post stuff about that as well. It's also handy when you find something cool and put it on there, since you have a fairly handy place to find it for yourself.

Well, I got: Quiz result Distros you should try are (in the correct order): 1. Gentoo Linux 2. Free BSD 3. Slackware Linux 4. Open BSD 5. Yoper Linux Surprise, surprise, as I currently use #1 and have used #2 and #4 as well. Never got around to slack.

Possibly hardware issue, but remember that NONE of the systems in your AD (including the DCs) should have any DNS server IP other than that of your AD DNS server(s). If you enter your ISP's DNS servers in your clients, and you are not using fully routed (commercial) IPs your clients will not resolve your domain controllers and will eventually bomb out.

Did you try the static IP entries? Just try them, as there might be an issue with the media sense portion of the client.

Originally posted by u_r_a_windroid: Quote: P.S. To the site keepers, really appreciate you deleting my original user name (NOT). Didn't do anything to warrant it. Something wrong with you people. Cliques REALLY suck. You have a PM from me.

Bear in mind that one will need to create a user account with some other forum in order to respond to him. So, I would ask that you simply ask your question will all of the detail over here.

Norton and McAfee have severely bloated applications in the domestic/retail environment. I have used McAfee AV for many years now and have been using the stock Windows firewall with XP SP2. I have just started testing Symantec Client Security 2.0.3 (the corporate version of the AV/Firewall package) and find that it is much faster and "lighter" than previous generations. I have it running in a virtual machine that I use as a test mule to see if applications try connecting to the Internet. If the retail version of their AV/Firewall app is about as good as Client Security 2.0.3, then I would recommend it. However, ZA is also nice, easy to use, and free.