| Author |
Message |
Wolf_Austria
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Dec 07, 2004 9:45 pm Post subject:
Sharename for DFS |
|
|
A customer needs to implement a root-replica with a share-name that's
different from the first DFS root's name (e.g. Root1 = \\Server1\DFSROOTX and
ROOT-Replica = \\Server1\DFSROOTY) - this was possible in 2000, but is no
longer possible in 2003. It is even possible to create the share using the
W2k mmc.
Does anybody have an input on this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jill Zoeller [MSFT]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 12:09 am Post subject:
Re: Sharename for DFS |
|
|
I don't have handy the specific reasons why this isn't supported , but I do
know that DFS can behave improperly if the root share name does not match
the root name, which is why we began enforcing this in the W2K3 snap-in.
What are the reasons why your customer can't match the names? What about
creating a second share name on the root share that matches the root name?
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights..
..
"Wolf_Austria" <Wolf_Austria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:297D2B5B-0A39-4553-86CB-5648E1400783@microsoft.com...
| Quote: | A customer needs to implement a root-replica with a share-name that's
different from the first DFS root's name (e.g. Root1 = \\Server1\DFSROOTX
and
ROOT-Replica = \\Server1\DFSROOTY) - this was possible in 2000, but is no
longer possible in 2003. It is even possible to create the share using the
W2k mmc.
Does anybody have an input on this?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wolf_Austria
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 12:23 am Post subject:
Re: Sharename for DFS |
|
|
Jill,
i have been asking the same question to my customer, and they simply what to
keep what they have right now until they create a new, cleaned up root.
The problem what they have is, that their root name is "DATA", and you might
imagne that their are shares with the same name out in the environment as
well - and this is the second reason why they want to keep the existing
sharename: simply avoid confusion.
Wolf
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
| Quote: | I don't have handy the specific reasons why this isn't supported , but I do
know that DFS can behave improperly if the root share name does not match
the root name, which is why we began enforcing this in the W2K3 snap-in.
What are the reasons why your customer can't match the names? What about
creating a second share name on the root share that matches the root name?
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights..
..
"Wolf_Austria" <Wolf_Austria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:297D2B5B-0A39-4553-86CB-5648E1400783@microsoft.com...
A customer needs to implement a root-replica with a share-name that's
different from the first DFS root's name (e.g. Root1 = \\Server1\DFSROOTX
and
ROOT-Replica = \\Server1\DFSROOTY) - this was possible in 2000, but is no
longer possible in 2003. It is even possible to create the share using the
W2k mmc.
Does anybody have an input on this?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jill Zoeller [MSFT]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 2:31 am Post subject:
Re: Sharename for DFS |
|
|
It is possible to add a second share name to a shared folder, and you could
match that share name to the root name.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Wolf_Austria" <WolfAustria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BA01A6F7-1D3B-450D-89C8-86C0C0AC2277@microsoft.com...
| Quote: | Jill,
i have been asking the same question to my customer, and they simply what
to
keep what they have right now until they create a new, cleaned up root.
The problem what they have is, that their root name is "DATA", and you
might
imagne that their are shares with the same name out in the environment as
well - and this is the second reason why they want to keep the existing
sharename: simply avoid confusion.
Wolf
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
I don't have handy the specific reasons why this isn't supported , but I
do
know that DFS can behave improperly if the root share name does not match
the root name, which is why we began enforcing this in the W2K3 snap-in.
What are the reasons why your customer can't match the names? What about
creating a second share name on the root share that matches the root
name?
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights..
..
"Wolf_Austria" <Wolf_Austria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:297D2B5B-0A39-4553-86CB-5648E1400783@microsoft.com...
A customer needs to implement a root-replica with a share-name that's
different from the first DFS root's name (e.g. Root1 =
\\Server1\DFSROOTX
and
ROOT-Replica = \\Server1\DFSROOTY) - this was possible in 2000, but is
no
longer possible in 2003. It is even possible to create the share using
the
W2k mmc.
Does anybody have an input on this?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wolf_Austria
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:07 am Post subject:
Re: Sharename for DFS |
|
|
Well,
of cause there are some workarounds like to add a second sharename. But
maybe someone (form the program team) can answer to the audience why this is
not supported anymore so that we can understand from technical point of view
this behavior as well.
I asked around but nobody could provide me with more detailed information.
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
| Quote: | It is possible to add a second share name to a shared folder, and you could
match that share name to the root name.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Wolf_Austria" <WolfAustria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BA01A6F7-1D3B-450D-89C8-86C0C0AC2277@microsoft.com...
Jill,
i have been asking the same question to my customer, and they simply what
to
keep what they have right now until they create a new, cleaned up root.
The problem what they have is, that their root name is "DATA", and you
might
imagne that their are shares with the same name out in the environment as
well - and this is the second reason why they want to keep the existing
sharename: simply avoid confusion.
Wolf
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
I don't have handy the specific reasons why this isn't supported , but I
do
know that DFS can behave improperly if the root share name does not match
the root name, which is why we began enforcing this in the W2K3 snap-in.
What are the reasons why your customer can't match the names? What about
creating a second share name on the root share that matches the root
name?
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights..
..
"Wolf_Austria" <Wolf_Austria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:297D2B5B-0A39-4553-86CB-5648E1400783@microsoft.com...
A customer needs to implement a root-replica with a share-name that's
different from the first DFS root's name (e.g. Root1 =
\\Server1\DFSROOTX
and
ROOT-Replica = \\Server1\DFSROOTY) - this was possible in 2000, but is
no
longer possible in 2003. It is even possible to create the share using
the
W2k mmc.
Does anybody have an input on this?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jill Zoeller [MSFT]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:56 am Post subject:
Re: Sharename for DFS |
|
|
I work directly with the DFS team and will ask them why matching names are
enforced.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Wolf_Austria" <WolfAustria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D236F0E5-261B-4519-BDCD-1FE99C9C1DC9@microsoft.com...
| Quote: | Well,
of cause there are some workarounds like to add a second sharename. But
maybe someone (form the program team) can answer to the audience why this
is
not supported anymore so that we can understand from technical point of
view
this behavior as well.
I asked around but nobody could provide me with more detailed information.
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
It is possible to add a second share name to a shared folder, and you
could
match that share name to the root name.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
"Wolf_Austria" <WolfAustria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BA01A6F7-1D3B-450D-89C8-86C0C0AC2277@microsoft.com...
Jill,
i have been asking the same question to my customer, and they simply
what
to
keep what they have right now until they create a new, cleaned up root.
The problem what they have is, that their root name is "DATA", and you
might
imagne that their are shares with the same name out in the environment
as
well - and this is the second reason why they want to keep the existing
sharename: simply avoid confusion.
Wolf
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
I don't have handy the specific reasons why this isn't supported , but
I
do
know that DFS can behave improperly if the root share name does not
match
the root name, which is why we began enforcing this in the W2K3
snap-in.
What are the reasons why your customer can't match the names? What
about
creating a second share name on the root share that matches the root
name?
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights..
..
"Wolf_Austria" <Wolf_Austria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
news:297D2B5B-0A39-4553-86CB-5648E1400783@microsoft.com...
A customer needs to implement a root-replica with a share-name that's
different from the first DFS root's name (e.g. Root1 =
\\Server1\DFSROOTX
and
ROOT-Replica = \\Server1\DFSROOTY) - this was possible in 2000, but
is
no
longer possible in 2003. It is even possible to create the share
using
the
W2k mmc.
Does anybody have an input on this?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wolf_Austria
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:09 am Post subject:
Re: Sharename for DFS |
|
|
Thanks for that.
//wolf
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
| Quote: | I work directly with the DFS team and will ask them why matching names are
enforced.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Wolf_Austria" <WolfAustria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D236F0E5-261B-4519-BDCD-1FE99C9C1DC9@microsoft.com...
Well,
of cause there are some workarounds like to add a second sharename. But
maybe someone (form the program team) can answer to the audience why this
is
not supported anymore so that we can understand from technical point of
view
this behavior as well.
I asked around but nobody could provide me with more detailed information.
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
It is possible to add a second share name to a shared folder, and you
could
match that share name to the root name.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
"Wolf_Austria" <WolfAustria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BA01A6F7-1D3B-450D-89C8-86C0C0AC2277@microsoft.com...
Jill,
i have been asking the same question to my customer, and they simply
what
to
keep what they have right now until they create a new, cleaned up root.
The problem what they have is, that their root name is "DATA", and you
might
imagne that their are shares with the same name out in the environment
as
well - and this is the second reason why they want to keep the existing
sharename: simply avoid confusion.
Wolf
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
I don't have handy the specific reasons why this isn't supported , but
I
do
know that DFS can behave improperly if the root share name does not
match
the root name, which is why we began enforcing this in the W2K3
snap-in.
What are the reasons why your customer can't match the names? What
about
creating a second share name on the root share that matches the root
name?
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights..
..
"Wolf_Austria" <Wolf_Austria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
news:297D2B5B-0A39-4553-86CB-5648E1400783@microsoft.com...
A customer needs to implement a root-replica with a share-name that's
different from the first DFS root's name (e.g. Root1 =
\\Server1\DFSROOTX
and
ROOT-Replica = \\Server1\DFSROOTY) - this was possible in 2000, but
is
no
longer possible in 2003. It is even possible to create the share
using
the
W2k mmc.
Does anybody have an input on this?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jill Zoeller [MSFT]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:32 am Post subject:
Re: Sharename for DFS |
|
|
I wasn't able to find out the exact reason why the snap-in does not support
creating a root that does not match the root share name. The people who made
the design decision are gone, but the remaining folks think the possible
reasons could be:
(a) To reduce the amount of testing they had to do.
(b) They identified problems that can occur when the two don't match, and
they decided that there was not enough business demand for having the two
not match, so they set up the matching enforcement to avoid the problems.
One problem that I found (from several years ago) had to do with DFS client
interaction with offline files when the root/root share name don't match.
There might be other problems, but the DFS/offline files interaction is the
one I could find.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Wolf_Austria" <WolfAustria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C43D70E4-0E1A-4A60-962B-26779B8AEBFB@microsoft.com...
| Quote: | Thanks for that.
//wolf
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
I work directly with the DFS team and will ask them why matching names
are
enforced.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
"Wolf_Austria" <WolfAustria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D236F0E5-261B-4519-BDCD-1FE99C9C1DC9@microsoft.com...
Well,
of cause there are some workarounds like to add a second sharename. But
maybe someone (form the program team) can answer to the audience why
this
is
not supported anymore so that we can understand from technical point of
view
this behavior as well.
I asked around but nobody could provide me with more detailed
information.
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
It is possible to add a second share name to a shared folder, and you
could
match that share name to the root name.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
"Wolf_Austria" <WolfAustria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
news:BA01A6F7-1D3B-450D-89C8-86C0C0AC2277@microsoft.com...
Jill,
i have been asking the same question to my customer, and they simply
what
to
keep what they have right now until they create a new, cleaned up
root.
The problem what they have is, that their root name is "DATA", and
you
might
imagne that their are shares with the same name out in the
environment
as
well - and this is the second reason why they want to keep the
existing
sharename: simply avoid confusion.
Wolf
"Jill Zoeller [MSFT]" wrote:
I don't have handy the specific reasons why this isn't supported ,
but
I
do
know that DFS can behave improperly if the root share name does not
match
the root name, which is why we began enforcing this in the W2K3
snap-in.
What are the reasons why your customer can't match the names? What
about
creating a second share name on the root share that matches the
root
name?
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights..
..
"Wolf_Austria" <Wolf_Austria@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
news:297D2B5B-0A39-4553-86CB-5648E1400783@microsoft.com...
A customer needs to implement a root-replica with a share-name
that's
different from the first DFS root's name (e.g. Root1 =
\\Server1\DFSROOTX
and
ROOT-Replica = \\Server1\DFSROOTY) - this was possible in 2000,
but
is
no
longer possible in 2003. It is even possible to create the share
using
the
W2k mmc.
Does anybody have an input on this?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in