Difference between 2000 mixed and 2003 interim (Domain FunctionalLevel)?

Discussion in 'MCSE' started by pez, Feb 28, 2008.

  1. pez

    pez Guest

    It seems that both these domain function levels have the same
    limitations. Why then would you choose 2003 interim (instead of 2000
    mixed)? At least with 2000 mixed you can have windows 2000 DC's.
     
    pez, Feb 28, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. pez

    John R Guest

    Re: Difference between 2000 mixed and 2003 interim (Domain Functional Level)?

    "pez" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > It seems that both these domain function levels have the same
    > limitations. Why then would you choose 2003 interim (instead of 2000
    > mixed)? At least with 2000 mixed you can have windows 2000 DC's.


    2003 Interim does not support 2000 DCs. It is intended for someone
    upgrading from an NT domain to 2003. If you are currently an NT domain, and
    you install a 2003 DC in Interim mode, why would you then install a 2000 DC?

    If your intent is to move to 2000 native, then you would choose 2000 mixed
    until you have upgraded all of your DCs to at least 2000. You could then
    later move to a 2003 domain, but it is more steps. You would choose this
    path only if you planned on staying on 2000 native for quite some time.
    Kind of silly if you ask me if 2003 is available.

    Note that we are talking strickly about DCs. All domain function levels
    support member servers all the way back to NT.

    John R
     
    John R, Feb 28, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. pez

    John R Guest

    Re: Difference between 2000 mixed and 2003 interim (Domain Functional Level)?

    "John R" <jsr^^^813@zoom^^^internet.net> wrote in message
    news:%...
    >
    > "pez" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> It seems that both these domain function levels have the same
    >> limitations. Why then would you choose 2003 interim (instead of 2000
    >> mixed)? At least with 2000 mixed you can have windows 2000 DC's.

    >
    > 2003 Interim does not support 2000 DCs. It is intended for someone
    > upgrading from an NT domain to 2003. If you are currently an NT domain,
    > and you install a 2003 DC in Interim mode, why would you then install a
    > 2000 DC?
    >
    > If your intent is to move to 2000 native, then you would choose 2000 mixed
    > until you have upgraded all of your DCs to at least 2000. You could then
    > later move to a 2003 domain, but it is more steps. You would choose this
    > path only if you planned on staying on 2000 native for quite some time.
    > Kind of silly if you ask me if 2003 is available.
    >
    > Note that we are talking strickly about DCs. All domain function levels
    > support member servers all the way back to NT.
    >
    > John R
    >


    lol, "strickly", can you tell I'm from Pittsburgh?
    I'd go daun-taun for some rogies if it wasn't so "slippy" outside.
    Go Stillers!

    John R
     
    John R, Feb 28, 2008
    #3
  4. pez

    LRM Guest

    Re: Difference between 2000 mixed and 2003 interim (Domain Functional Level)?

    "John R" <jsr^^^813@zoom^^^internet.net> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "John R" <jsr^^^813@zoom^^^internet.net> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >>
    >> "pez" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> It seems that both these domain function levels have the same
    >>> limitations. Why then would you choose 2003 interim (instead of 2000
    >>> mixed)? At least with 2000 mixed you can have windows 2000 DC's.

    >>
    >> 2003 Interim does not support 2000 DCs. It is intended for someone
    >> upgrading from an NT domain to 2003. If you are currently an NT domain,
    >> and you install a 2003 DC in Interim mode, why would you then install a
    >> 2000 DC?
    >>
    >> If your intent is to move to 2000 native, then you would choose 2000
    >> mixed until you have upgraded all of your DCs to at least 2000. You
    >> could then later move to a 2003 domain, but it is more steps. You would
    >> choose this path only if you planned on staying on 2000 native for quite
    >> some time. Kind of silly if you ask me if 2003 is available.
    >>
    >> Note that we are talking strickly about DCs. All domain function levels
    >> support member servers all the way back to NT.
    >>
    >> John R
    >>

    >
    > lol, "strickly", can you tell I'm from Pittsburgh?
    > I'd go daun-taun for some rogies if it wasn't so "slippy" outside.
    > Go Stillers!
    >
    > John R
    >

    Hey nice, both correct and moderately humorous!
     
    LRM, Feb 28, 2008
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. PyramidAsh
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    16,096
    Walter Roberson
    Sep 21, 2005
  2. Steve Freides

    Difference between Domain and Workgroup

    Steve Freides, Nov 8, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    18,301
  3. Interim camera: 30D or 400D

    , Sep 5, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    519
    David J. Littleboy
    Sep 6, 2006
  4. =?Utf-8?B?VGVyZW5jZSBUaG9tYXM=?=

    Upgrading to Win 2003 domain from win 2000 domain

    =?Utf-8?B?VGVyZW5jZSBUaG9tYXM=?=, Jul 5, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    621
    Charlie Russel - MVP
    Jul 5, 2005
  5. AJR
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,009
    Bruno NĂ³brega
    Feb 20, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page