MACS in a NT4 Domain being upgraded to 2003 Domain
we have MacOS9 and MacOSX on the network
We also have a majority of windows based PC's
The domain controllers and majority of servers are NT4
We have done a swing migration of the domain controllers to 2003, with 2 NT 4 Servers still acting as backup domain controllers.
Our mail server is exchange 5.5 on NT 4 (which will be migrated to exchange 2003 as part 2 of migration)
Our macs, can still access all the folders, and printer.
But they are unable to talk to the exchange 5.5 server anymore, regardless of using Entourage or Outlook 2001 for Mac.
We have the correct entries in DNS for resolving to this, and the mac's are picking up the right address for DNS resolution from the 2003 AD server.
ALL the windows PC's dont have a problem talking to exchange.
The macs keep telling us that they can not find the exchange server.
any idea's as on monday at this stage we will have phase one done, but no email for mac users??
Raybans
We also have a majority of windows based PC's
The domain controllers and majority of servers are NT4
We have done a swing migration of the domain controllers to 2003, with 2 NT 4 Servers still acting as backup domain controllers.
Our mail server is exchange 5.5 on NT 4 (which will be migrated to exchange 2003 as part 2 of migration)
Our macs, can still access all the folders, and printer.
But they are unable to talk to the exchange 5.5 server anymore, regardless of using Entourage or Outlook 2001 for Mac.
We have the correct entries in DNS for resolving to this, and the mac's are picking up the right address for DNS resolution from the 2003 AD server.
ALL the windows PC's dont have a problem talking to exchange.
The macs keep telling us that they can not find the exchange server.
any idea's as on monday at this stage we will have phase one done, but no email for mac users??
Raybans
ASKER
the problem is the new 2003 domain has .local
the standards say that if local appears in the FQDN then it is a local address only.
it appears that microsoft and apple are following this standard in 2 different ways.
microsoft are using DNS for all internal, so there fore using local makes sense, and helps to make sure that your not using a real world domain name, and reducing any conflict.
apple say that if it has .local, they are going to ignore DNS and use their prorietory system for LAN communications with other apple devices (MAc's iPods, Airports etc) using (my spelling may be off) Rendezvous.
so while some people at apple are saying we are doing the wrong thing and not sticking to the standards as most microsoft documentation suggest (but does not dictatc) using .local. the apple company has followed its own path on how to look up things locally.
in my opinion, apple is guilty of making the mistake that MS did when they used NetBUI and NetBIOS.
at least with earlier windows, a PC would look up host file, then WINS, and then DNS for name resolution.
but in this case Apple use Rendezvous, and gives up.
We have rolled back to NT4 domain controllers and will upgrade again later with a different FQDN, purely for apple, wanting to go in their own direction and interpretation of the "standard" and their choice not to be flexible, without us visiting and making changes to every mac on the network on how they look up other members on the network.
the standards say that if local appears in the FQDN then it is a local address only.
it appears that microsoft and apple are following this standard in 2 different ways.
microsoft are using DNS for all internal, so there fore using local makes sense, and helps to make sure that your not using a real world domain name, and reducing any conflict.
apple say that if it has .local, they are going to ignore DNS and use their prorietory system for LAN communications with other apple devices (MAc's iPods, Airports etc) using (my spelling may be off) Rendezvous.
so while some people at apple are saying we are doing the wrong thing and not sticking to the standards as most microsoft documentation suggest (but does not dictatc) using .local. the apple company has followed its own path on how to look up things locally.
in my opinion, apple is guilty of making the mistake that MS did when they used NetBUI and NetBIOS.
at least with earlier windows, a PC would look up host file, then WINS, and then DNS for name resolution.
but in this case Apple use Rendezvous, and gives up.
We have rolled back to NT4 domain controllers and will upgrade again later with a different FQDN, purely for apple, wanting to go in their own direction and interpretation of the "standard" and their choice not to be flexible, without us visiting and making changes to every mac on the network on how they look up other members on the network.
Hi Raybans,
I did not know that you were having other issues as well then.
See if this might speed things along for you if you can.
http://www.macwindows.com/AD.html#060204
This also might have some good things.
http://www.macwindows.com/AD.html#5
Thanks,
Steven Stuart
I did not know that you were having other issues as well then.
See if this might speed things along for you if you can.
http://www.macwindows.com/AD.html#060204
This also might have some good things.
http://www.macwindows.com/AD.html#5
Thanks,
Steven Stuart
Hi Raybans,
No Need to downgrade. You can write a script in Terminal in OSX to get the mac to resolve .local names via rendezvous (macs own lookup) and DNS (not usually configured to check .lcoal).
See here for info.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=107800
Tried and tested here at my end
No Need to downgrade. You can write a script in Terminal in OSX to get the mac to resolve .local names via rendezvous (macs own lookup) and DNS (not usually configured to check .lcoal).
See here for info.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=107800
Tried and tested here at my end
ASKER
The end result was the best solution was to roll back, as there was only one server to be concerned with and the domain was still able to with stand this, as we only lost 8 hours work, instead of writing scripts and workarounds for the problem which would have taken a lot more testing and left us with an environment more complecated to manage, then the current setup for Macs on the windows network.
The moral of the story.
APPLE has a different interpretaion of the RFC to linux, and windows, and unix etc
it causes the problem.
once this is know using a domain like, company.office resolves all these problems
The moral of the story.
APPLE has a different interpretaion of the RFC to linux, and windows, and unix etc
it causes the problem.
once this is know using a domain like, company.office resolves all these problems
Personally, I would leave all these Exchange Server 2003|Mac OS 9 & OS X questions open for the rest of the Q1 & Q2. ie, it would help me personally ;-> as I have just started with these problems; I suspect such environments will become more common in the forseeable future....
BT
BT
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
See if the possible solutions here help with your problem. Especially look at Aimee's July 7 response, and John Parnaby's January 26, 2001 response, I think those are the most credible, but check them out for yourself.
http://www.macwindows.com/xch55sp2.html#070600
Thanks,
Steven Stuart