2008 Native 2 DC's just upgraded from 2000 and demoted out old 2k DC's
In my formal training at school, our trainer warned us of a real world experience. He said,
"If you have only one DC, you are okay to have all roles and a GC. The MINUTE you add another GC, remove the GC function from the DC that holds your FSMO roles." It has something to do with the roles causing issues replicating GC data. And that teacher had a lot of good real world tips. So I am inclined to believe him.
I have 2003 Exchange Standard. We are migrating to 2007. But since we changed to 2008, an exchange guru advised this,
"I have seen this many times. DO NOT point your exchange server in recipient update services to a DC that holds the PDC role AND is a GC." (Same type of warning for a GC my teach gave me).
So I changed it. But I am feeling like I should search on "OS-Snopes.com" : )
Why would there be such a huge flaw? And if they know about it, why don't they release a sp update that either prevents you from doing this (graying out the option), or log a warning event that explains why you shouldn't do this. Something like
"Warning. AD has detected a secondary GC catalog Server. GC on this FSMO role holder has been disabled to prevent problems. See technet article 44430222220430404444400404.4444.2c for details)"
Here's the kicker. In our old AD, I am pretty sure both DC's were GC's. Now don't get me wrong. I do not want any weird issues with my network, so I am willing to follow any tip from the masters. But I would also like to understand why.
So is it any FSMO role, or just the PDC that should not be a GC when other GC's exist? Is this a myth or not?!? And why.