Yes, it is another domain controller. My mistake, the two actually back each other up. Either way, he is still correct.

0

"My mistake, the two actually back each other up." LOL, there is no backup domain controller in AD. Both domain controllers are providing AD services. There is no notion of "the DC/Exchange server only services AD when the first domain controller is down". It services clients just as the other DC does. Just stop it already. Wanderer is right, it is best to not have Exchange running on a DC if you can help it. "can someone name for me or recommand a specific backup auto-loader model number and from which brand should i go with." I'd go with whichever brand you're using for your servers. Both HP and Dell make good units. Just make sure you go with LTO tape types, as they are more reliable and have greater capacity. "Enough, enough bowing down to disillusion! Hats off & applause to rogues & evolution! The ripple effect is too good not to mention. If you’re not affected, you’re not paying attention!"

0

How is it, 7 years after the release of Active Directory, it appears the computing world is still stuck back in NT? I see this "backup domain controller" all over the web and not just here. Doesn't anyone read books anymore? Give a person a fish, they eat for a day. Suggest they internet search and they learn a skill for a lifetime.

0

Hero - get over yourself. I am well aware there are no BDCs in AD. I know it, OK. Got it. You can stop saying it already. But to just dismiss the point that two DCs "back each other up" is silly. It is exactly what they do. I'm not calling them a BDC in terms of how NT4 worked, I'm simply saying that from a functional standpoint it is what happens. They are equal to each other notwithstanding the FSMO roles, and I've agreed that having Exchange on a DC is not optimal. But I will stand by my statement that having two DCs even if one has to be one Exchange (hopefully temporarily) is better than only having one DC. And by the way - were you aware there are no BDCs in Active Directory?

0

"Hero - get over yourself. I am well aware there are no BDCs in AD. I know it, OK. Got it. You can stop saying it already." Dude, I'm not the one saying "backup domain controller". You are. And the problems linked to running AD on an exchange server are not alleviated because it's not the sole domain controller. The original poster implied it was okay to have an Exchange server to also be a DC because it's just backing up the other one. That does not address the risk of why it's bad to do it. Read the link. This issue isn't just a load issue. There are fundamental problems/limitations that happen when you choose to run Exchange on a DC. The server could have 4 gigs of memory, and two quadcore processors, etc. and it's still not good to do it. For example... "Several Exchange Server directory components, such as Directory Service Access (DSAccess), Directory Service Proxy (DSProxy), and the Message Categorizer will not fail over to any other domain controller or global catalog server." Translation, if AD services stop for any reason on the Exchange server, the Exchange server cannot function, even if the other DC is fine. Exchange will by far use up the most resources on DC's, but it still will not load balance between the two DC's for directory lookups. "This configuration is less secure because Exchange administrators will have local administrative access to Active Directory. This enables them to elevate their own privileges. Additionally, any security vulnerability found in either Exchange Server or Active Directory exposes the other to compromise." "If you are running Exchange Server 2003 or Exchange Server 2007 on a domain controller, using the domain controller promotion tool (DCPromo) to change the computer role is not supported, and it is known to break components such as Microsoft Outlook® Mobile Access." "You should not take advantage of the /3GB startup switch in Windows because it could cause Exchange Server to consume all memory, therefore reducing the memory available for Active Directory." Not using this switch with a gig or more of RAM can result in memory fragmentation problems, which can cause Exchange to crash. It's a bad idea, period. I wouldn't run AD with anything less than two domain controllers, and I wouldn't run Exchange on a DC in a production environment, period. These aren't trivial issues. Check out what you have to do if you want to correct it after the fact... "To correct this warning by moving Exchange to another computer 1. Install Exchange Server on a different computer. 2. Use Move Mailbox in the Exchange Task Wizard to move any existing mailboxes from the domain controller to the new Exchange server. 3. Rehome any public folders and roles held by the old Exchange Server computer to the new Exchange Server computer. 4. Uninstall Exchange Server from the domain controller." Just don't do it from the get go. "But I will stand by my statement that having two DCs even if one has to be one Exchange (hopefully temporarily) is better than only having one DC." No one ever said go to one domain controller. We said that there is no notion of a backup domain controller in AD, and even if there is at least another Exchange server, it does not mitigate the risk of running AD on an Exchange server. I stand by what is officially supported and what are best practices. You're not just arguing against what Wanderer and I are saying, you're arguing against Microsoft. I trust Microsoft more than I trust you, as should any rational person. "Enough, enough bowing down to disillusion! Hats off & applause to rogues & evolution! The ripple effect is too good not to mention. If you’re not affected, you’re not paying attention!"

0

I can't really say what the "best" backup scheme would be, because honestly, I don't have that expertise. But here is what I use where I work. We recently purchased a dedicated backup server. It is an HP DL320s with 10, 500GB SATA drives. I connected these drives in two RAID 5 arrays. RAID 5 might be overkill for backups, but I wanted it just in case. I've had problems in the past with tapes, so I didn't mess with them when I was setting this up. The server runs Backup Exec and is physically located about 3 miles from the rest of the servers. I did this because I have gigabit fiber connecting the sites, so that is something that you would probably have to tailor to your specific circumstances. The servers that actually store the data have to have remote agents installed. Symantec makes remote agents for Exchange, SQL, and Active Directory, so that is all very standard. The backup schedule we use, I'm not sure if it is technically grandfather-father-son or not, but it is close. We do weekly full backups, deleting the previous week, and daily differential backups. Once a month we copy a full weekly backup and keep it as a monthly backup.

0

Thanks all of you guys and i really appreciate your help and advices. and about the AD & Exchange in one server is not recommanded, yes it is but my boss want it like that so we have to follow his instructions. and thanks again for whoever helped me on the backup strategy Khalid IT Officer RSF

0

"my boss want it like that so we have to follow his instructions." Show him the documentation I provided you, and make him aware why it's a bad idea. Do it through email so there's a documentation path. to cover your butt. If he still says to do it that way, hey, you tried your best, and he can't blame you or anyone else for the bad configuration. And BTW, if it were me in that situation, I'd then pursue a new position elsewhere if you can. People who flat out disregard vendor best practices are usually trouble for your career. "Enough, enough bowing down to disillusion! Hats off & applause to rogues & evolution! The ripple effect is too good not to mention. If you’re not affected, you’re not paying attention!"

0