Remove Non-Existent DC's
-
This is good timing.
I have two physical 2003 DCs I want to make VMs.
I figured the easiest way would be to stand up a new 2003 DC VM, transfer all the roles and AD to that, then demote both the physical machines and P2V them.
I bet I will need this article. (Maybe not, though.)
-
@BRRABill said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
This is good timing.
I have two physical 2003 DCs I want to make VMs.
I figured the easiest way would be to stand up a new 2003 DC VM, transfer all the roles and AD to that, then demote both the physical machines and P2V them.
I bet I will need this article. (Maybe not, though.)
2003 DC's?
....
-
@BRRABill said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
This is good timing.
I have two physical 2003 DCs I want to make VMs.
I figured the easiest way would be to stand up a new 2003 DC VM, transfer all the roles and AD to that, then demote both the physical machines and P2V them.
I bet I will need this article. (Maybe not, though.)
2003! What?
-
Waiting for 2016 to come out...
-
Annnnnnnnnnnnnnny day now.......
-
@BRRABill said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
Annnnnnnnnnnnnnny day now.......
Probably not. Most likely in Sept-Nov time frame.
-
@coliver said
Probably not. Most likely in Sept-Nov time frame.
As long as I have been waiting, that is basically any day now.
-
@BRRABill said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
@coliver said
Probably not. Most likely in Sept-Nov time frame.
As long as I have been waiting, that is basically any day now.
Anyone have a pool going on if their new file system will be ready by then?
-
@travisdh1 ReFS? Stable but slow and a few missing features AFAIK. Probably in Server 2026. @scottalanmiller and @KOOLER can tell you a few things about this.
-
The new 2003 server I stood up on modern hardware and SSDs was blazing.
I know ML loves the latest and greatest, but 2003 was a good OS. Still is, security patches notwithstanding.
-
@BRRABill said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
The new 2003 server I stood up on modern hardware and SSDs was blazing.
I know ML loves the latest and greatest, but 2003 was a good OS. Still is, security patches notwithstanding.
Nothing to do with latest and greatest. This is simply getting up-to-date to be secure and stable. 2003 was not a stable operating system it was almost constantly moments away from failing spectacularly. R2 made it more stable but still not as good as 2008R2 or 2012R2.
-
@coliver said
Nothing to do with latest and greatest. This is simply getting up-to-date to be secure and stable. 2003 was not a stable operating system it was almost constantly moments away from failing spectacularly. R2 made it more stable but still not as good as 2008R2 or 2012R2.
All depends on what you do.
For my smaller business needs I have never had any issues.
Of course now today I am expecting a spectacular failing.
-
@BRRABill said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
The new 2003 server I stood up on modern hardware and SSDs was blazing.
I had to do a double take.
New 2003 server? Tell us more.
-
@Breffni-Potter said
I had to do a double take.
New 2003 server? Tell us more.
I posted a little earlier in the thread.
To facilitate a P2V move of other DCs.
We are waiting for 2016 to come out.
-
@BRRABill said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
@Breffni-Potter said
I had to do a double take.
New 2003 server? Tell us more.
I posted a little earlier in the thread.
Whoops, so you did.
The 2003 box is not public facing though right?
-
@Breffni-Potter said
The 2003 box is not public facing though right?
No.
But even still, are there any unpatched breaches is the wild? Not that I have heard of.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
@BRRABill said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
The new 2003 server I stood up on modern hardware and SSDs was blazing.
I had to do a double take.
New 2003 server? Tell us more.
Read earlier in the thread. Basically waiting till Server 2016 comes out to update to the most recent version.
-
@BRRABill said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
The new 2003 server I stood up on modern hardware and SSDs was blazing.
I know ML loves the latest and greatest, but 2003 was a good OS. Still is, security patches notwithstanding.
It was mediocre. It was slow and lacked key features even in its heyday. It was the last of the NT5 line and did okay. 2003 R2 was a big better, 2003 was meh. It only seemed good because 2000 had been so horrible.
-
I spun up a 2012 R2 box and a 2003 box this evening for a test.
Identical VM specs, ram, CPU the lot.
Man oh man is that 2003 box slow. The 03 box was still shutting down by the time the 12 box had restarted and come back.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in Remove Non-Existent DC's:
I spun up a 2012 R2 box and a 2003 box this evening for a test.
Identical VM specs, ram, CPU the lot.
Man oh man is that 2003 box slow. The 03 box was still shutting down by the time the 12 box had restarted and come back.
Yeah, 2003 was not all that great. Neither were 2000, 2008 and 2008 R2. But NT 4 and 2012 and later were quite good.
