THE OFFICIAL BLOG OF THE SBS "DIVA"

If that is the case how come MS state this on the SBS pages at http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/techinfo/overview/generalfaq.mspx

"There can be only one Windows Small Business Server 2003 server in a domain. Each Windows Small Business Server 2003 server is typically connected to the Internet either directly, or via a firewall. Windows Small Business Server 2003 does not support trusts between domains; therefore, user names and resources could not be shared between those Windows Small Business Server 2003 servers. Further, Windows Small Business Server 2003 installs at the root of the Active Directory forest, and it cannot be demoted, or have the flexible single-master operation (FSMO) roles removed."

With this in mind, Nick is correct and this is the single greatest weakness of an otherwise greate product.

The second server has to be a Win2k3. Simple as that, no other "SBS" box.

It can always have a backup domain controller, it' just can't do trusts with a second [or other domains]. We do have to have all the FSMO roles.

You see it as a weakness, I see it as not being an issue. A properly built server/system doesn't have issues with this setup.

Hi Susan,

I see it as a weakness in that, if a company has a lot of small offices with less than 6 people per office, it means that SBS can only be installed in one office and a VPN needs to be used for all other remote office users. This is a problem with international offices where the lines can be slow. It would have been better if many multiple SBS servers could be installed as long as there was a Win2k3 server amonst them. This would enable SBS to be used more effectively -- all on the same domain -- to the maximum of 75 users in that domain.

Barry

You have a backup domain controller in those remote sites. SBS2k3 is still needing to be the main one, but you can do other servers as local domain controllers.

Hi Susan,

Yes but not additional SBS servers. Any attempt to "join" multiple SBS into a single domain is not supported. So for "small" offices, it is not cost effective unless you have ONLY one office.

So, if you want to install the very same functionality for office #2 (4 people) we would need to purchase:

win2k3 server
Exchange 2k3 server
Sharepoint portal server
SQL server
CRM server (again)
additional CAL's as the ones on the original SBS box cannot be used.

Hmm.

SBS == Single Office Server

Barry

No, Single domain controller in the second office and then you hook back into the main SBS for your Exchange.

Or.....

You can have totally independant SBS Sites, and use RWW to "chat" amongst the sites. However, I would normally have a second DC and use OWA for the remote users email.

In this config, you can also have three or four sites, each with their own email domain that can talk to each other. We have one site that uses sub domains for each site.

Granted, this is not ideal, but this is SBS.... not the enterprise products.

Hi Susan,

So in other words SBS is Small company, one office.

Case closed.

Thanks for the input.

Barry

No. Small Company, mulitple offices. You arent seeing the opportunities. SBS is the main server in the head office, backup DCs in the branches. They look back to the SBS for the Exhange. We do in SBS land.

Barry, just read your comment.

SBS IS small company, but NOT one office. You can happily have SBS Sites all talking to each other, just not the same way as the full enterprise products (trusts).

You can either do what Susan suggests, or you have do what I suggest further up the post. Point in fact, I have one company here in Ireland that has 5 SBS Sites. They all have independant domains, and all work together using the SPS Services, OWA, OMA, Exchange etc. Not one complaint yet.

Each site is setup well, with SUS, Central AV. The companies IT person can connect to any machine on the networks, files are shared, email is sent. Why would a small company want anything more?

I do grant you all one thing. I would like to see the allowance to have SQL / ISA / Exchange on seperate boxes. Even these small businesses are managing to hammer the bejesus out of the servers.

Cheers,

Nick.

Have enjoyed reading your heated debate.
Can any of you tell me where I can get detailed information on how to set up a PDC with a BDC using w2k3?
I would be much obliged.

Gregor

how can i install sql server2000 on a second domain controller....What is UNC

Nick has hit the nail on the head, I have recently moved from working winthin infrastructure teams dealing with networks using 'enterprise' products that can be distributed, to running a smaller netwok in a small company where I'm responsible for the lot..

They are using SBS 2003, seems a decent product offering much of the full blown functionality of the larger separate apps, but it scares the hell out of me not having a second server, if this goes, the doamin, email etc are all down until it is restored somewhere.

I'll be installing a BDC, but given how cheaply small servers can be bought (i.e. by a lower spec server as a backup to save costs for a small company) it would make sense for MS to allow secondary SBS servers, and they could sell more licenses!

To me this is a grave weakness, that if changed by MS would make this an excellent product for small businesses.

If you buy good hardware and have spares...they don't go down.

It's not a weakness if you build in workarounds folks.

Big firms don't have backups anymore than we do. Can we get over THAT myth?

http://fac.ce.vreau.eu.org/sbs.html

Costin...that totally breaks your SBS and you know it...we've had this argument before and people who have tried your method end up totally thrashing a SBS box and having to flatten it.

In SBS 2k3 you'll have a server shut off in 4 days.

no susan, that only takes your bread. instead buying additional software, intelligent customers use my free information.

No intelligent customers stay away from your illegal and illadvised info that definitely doesn't work in SBS 2003.

You want to kill a SBS box and put it in an unsupported, illegal condition, then fine.

Most small businesses want to stay legal Costin.

Susan, I doubt that MS will turn "soup-nazi" on every little company that does things like that, but the suggestion is both intriguing and dangerous. I definifely can see a need for it. I've heard that some companies deploy SBS only for Exchange, put it in its own domain, and then authenticate their Outlook clients manually against it. I guess Exchange itself doesn't care about the licensing issues, so if you can fit all your e-mail into the 16GB mail store limit, you're good to go. Has anyone else actually tried Costin's method?

Yes people have tried it, and gotten their boxes so screwed up that when they called PSS to fix it the only remedy was to flatten and start over.

Actually, I just got done doing an install. What I did was create one SBS2k3 server at our main office. Then I took another server with SBS2k3 and ran through the wizard....when that finished up I ran dcpromo to demote it. Then I removed exchange (connecting to computer at main office) and ran dcpromo again. Now I have two servers that can see each other and are connected through a VPN firewall. Active Directory is replicating just fine, we can see the entire network through both sites, and connect email using RPC over HTTP. Thoughts?

In 14 days that one SBS is going to see the other DC and freak.

Why 14 days? ...and what do you mean by freak? Could you back this up with some factual knowledge or perhaps a source?

Yes I can back it up with factual knowledge:

If that one SBS sees another domain controller, the SBcore service will shut it down. It's in the documentation. And go search the newsgroup for the times that people have tried to put two SBS domains side by side.

Windows 2003 Small Business Server Shuts Down Unexpectedly; Events 1001, 1013 and 1014 are Logged:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;555087

»Re: SBS 2003 shuting down: sbcore finding multiple domain controllers« - NewsArch:[ newsgroup.microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs ]:
http://www.newsarch.com/archive/newsgroup/microsoft/public/windows/server/sbs/msg33862.html

Thank you for your comments and links. They are much appreciated.

Ok, so now my scenerio changes...We have 3 different locations and all want the same domain for email. We will need to have each server as a seperate domain controller with a different domain name. How can I ensure that mail is routed properly to domain.com with 3 SBS2k3 DCs in 3 different locations? Is this possible with SBS 2003? If not I believe the only option would be to have a w2k3 or w2k member server at 2 of the locations for file storage and use rpc over http to connect to the central office...

In Exchange there's a way to "bounce out" email that isn't resolving in this domain and forward it to the next.

Best thing is to come to the sbs2k-subscribe-at-yahoogroups.com listserve and bounce your ideas off of other folk.

Jeff,

If the sites are well connected via the Internet, why simply connect them with always on VPN, put domain controllers in two sites, the SBS box in the other. I have several clients with this setup. Excellent results.

Is it possible to attach a new SBS2k3 server to an existing Windows 2000 Server network? The SBS is on a different domain and will be moved out of the exisitng network within a few weeks, but needs to be setup and tested by users in the existing office.

Thanks!

I am in the same boat I need to setup a new sbs2003, in a exisitng nt4 domain, the nt4 will be decomissioned aft a couple of weeks but I need to test the new one etc etc.

Any help appreciated
Terry

Terry check out www.sbsmigration.com and come into the yahoogroups at sbs2k-subscribe-at-yahoogroups.com for great advice

Wow, talk about going back and forth! These posts are makin me dizzy. Just for some clerification, I CANNOT setup another SBS domain controller on my netowrk but I can setup a SBS installation as a backup domain controller on my current SBS domain? Or does this BDC have to be a straight Server 2k installation joining my SBS domain? Some clerification would help greatly, everyone here seems to know what they are talking about and the information in very helpfull.
Thx

That was fun to read:)
I have a SBS 2003 and have six locations I would like to connect. I'm currently using SonicWalls for the vpn connections. I have a secondary machine I would like to setup as the BDC. All location have diffrent domain names.

My question is what does everyone think is the best way to set this up?
I will need to use the BDC as a Terminal Server.
Is the installation straight forward on the BDC?
Thanks

I just installed 2k3srvr onto my SBS03 domain and installed exch2003 on the 2nd box.
All is well except OWA. I have tried to redirect this from the SBS box(which is configured as an front end).. but it just wont resolve.. anyone else have this issue?

I'm faced with a situation where I need to upgrade to Exchange Enterprise 2003 because the information store limit will be reached on SBS 2003.

Can the mail server be a member server of the SBS domain without causing interruption?

get sp2 for exchange 2003 now out. 16gb limit has been raised to 75gb for standard versions!