Urgent! MS Virtual Machine Server and DCs, need arguments against
Posted on 2005-04-11
Doing some contracting during a datacenter migration for a company and one of their plans is to move their 2 DCs off stand-alone servers to 2 instances running on Microsoft Virtual Server 2005.
I'm not a complete VMS expert but I do know that MS doesn't recommend this for a production environment. My gut says moving their DCs along with DNS and DHCP complately to VMS is a bad idea. My vote (even though I don't really have one since I just push the buttons) is to at least compromise and leave one DC physical.
I'm working along side their direct admins and most of them feel this is a bad idea as well but have been shot down repeatedly and told do it anyway. As you can guess morale is a problem at this point. There are no budget or space constraints. These folks has 300+ servers and they are getting back about 100 by rolling out VMS. For the life of me I can't figure out why they would be so against keeping a DC on it's own server.
I was able to get a meeting for tomorrow and could use some help with articulate arguments against putting EVERYTHING I mentioned to VMS.
Basically we are up against a senior admin who is "setting the new direction" and his word seems to be golden to management. As an "example" about his direction he also wants to DHCP the same VM DC's etc... He has no idea what he's doing.