From: John Cuccia 

I had thought, though, that if you upgraded an NT4 xDC in place to W2K, the
new OS would emulate the NT4 features?   I see now that, when
you upgrade a PDC, you get AD whether you want it or not.  You can run the
new box in "mixed mode", in which a single AD DC does indeed
emulate an NT4 PDC, but AD is still there.

To my knowledge, installation of a W2K box as a member server in an NT4
domain does not require AD.  In that case the W2K machine is functionally
equivalent to any other NT4 Server (non-domain controller) in the domain.


On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 09:15:07 +0100, Chris Robinson
 wrote:

>Not as far as I'm aware.  I've only set up a couple of Win2k server boxes and
>bith have required AD to be set up.  I think it's pretty much required -
>especially if it's going to be a DC, although Win2k domains work differently
to
>NT4 domains - you don't have a PDC and BDC as such - you have "member
>servers".  It really is an unwanted feature by many.  The only reason some
>people will upgrade from NT4 to Win2k Server/ 2003 Server is because they're
>being forced.
>
>Chris.
>
>John Cuccia wrote:
>
>> Can't an NT4 xDC be upgraded to W2K without installing Active
>> Directory, and won't the W2K box server as an NT4-style domain
>> controller in that case?
>>
>> On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:24:33 -0500, "Geo."
 wrote:
>>
>> >It would be a big effort for no gain, in fact it would be a
step backwards
>> >for anyone who doesn't need any active directory features.
>> >
>> >Geo.
>> >
>> >"Chris Robinson"
 wrote in message
>> >news:3E87FF7C.82AC6BCA{at}NOSPAMtotalise.co.uk...
>> >> It wouldn't be too bad if it was as simple as just doing
an upgrade but
>> >it's not.  Win2k Server deployment would probably be a
>> >> company-wide initiative and require an Active Directory structure
>> >designing first.  It'd be a big effort to deploy in large organisations
>> >> that run stable, perfectly usable NT4 server installations.
>> >>
>> >> Chris.
>> >

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4