[Okta Webinar] Learn how to a build a cloud-first strategyRegister Now

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 1594
  • Last Modified:

SBS 2003 to 2011 migration - MS approach vs Swing migration?

Hi Guys

As per title really, I've done 2003 to 2003 swing migrations and they've always worked pretty well, I know the new products have migration modes built in, anyone tried both and if so which work better?

Many thanks
0
Corp_Jones
Asked:
Corp_Jones
  • 8
  • 5
  • 4
2 Solutions
 
Glen KnightCommented:
0
 
Corp_JonesAuthor Commented:
Thanks Demazter :) can you tell me if I can use the same server name using MS method, e..g if original SBS 2003 server was called Server1 can the new SBS2011 server be called Server1 too, I remember that was the main benefit I think of earlier swing migrations.
0
 
Glen KnightCommented:
No it cannot but then, to be honest, it shouldn't need to be the same name.
0
Simplify Active Directory Administration

Administration of Active Directory does not have to be hard.  Too often what should be a simple task is made more difficult than it needs to be.The solution?  Hyena from SystemTools Software.  With ease-of-use as well as powerful importing and bulk updating capabilities.

 
dmessmanCommented:
I haven't done any SBS 2011 migrations, but I have done both an MS recommended 2003->2008 migration and a 2003->2008 swing migration.  

I found the swing migration tedious - though I was able to keep my server name the same and when I ran into trouble with sysvol corruption during my swing migration,I was able to stop where I was and keep the SBS 2003 box in place.  All in all, both methods work - and each is a fine option.  

The help with the swing migration from Jeff Middleton can be pretty valuable if you're a little apprehensive about the migration process.
0
 
Glen KnightCommented:
Why do you want the same servername?

There is no technical reason for doing this?  Infact it's probably better it isn't the same.
0
 
dmessmanCommented:
I believe keeping the same server name is recommended but not required.  There is no technical or logical reason for keeping it the same.  It's just what's recommended.  
0
 
Glen KnightCommented:
Recommended by who? If you use a "supported" migration method following the migration guide you would have a different servername.

It's a byproduct or a business requirement it's certainly not a recommendation.
0
 
dmessmanCommented:
recommended by Jeff Middleton - the guy who runs the Swing Migration web site.  www.swingmigration.com

0
 
Corp_JonesAuthor Commented:
Thanks dmessman, do you find swing migration easier to recover from if something did go wrong? havent done the MS way but with swing migration if something goes wrong your original server is normally still usable fine.
0
 
Glen KnightCommented:
I've never found a migration however bad it is (and I seem to be specializing in recovering failed migrations at the moment) that have stopped the original sever from working.
0
 
Glen KnightCommented:
What I have found is when people don't follow the instructions and try to perform a migration on a server with errors, instead if fixing them first, is when things go wrong.
0
 
Corp_JonesAuthor Commented:
I may have to try the MS way too then, in the next week or 2 i'll be doing the swing way as i've already prepped it, the next one i'll try the MS way and then go from there, I guess having the same server name is not critical, its just always how we've done it to keep things transparent.
0
 
Glen KnightCommented:
In what way transparent?

Exchange will automatically update outlook clients with the new name.  Any mapped drives should ideally be done using login scripts or Group Policies so this can also be changed centrally.

Check my guide out in the first post.  I follow it myself when doing a migration so I am constantly updating it with new findings. I also did 11 virtual migrations whilst writing it.
0
 
dmessmanCommented:
I've never had any major problems using the Microsoft recommended way of migrating.  I agree with demazter that you need to just follow the steps to make sure everything is right first (typically with a BPA as well as some other checks) and then you should be fine.

My next migration will be using the MS method if that helps.  I found that the swing method was actually much more time consuming in terms of hundreds of minor changes to make - but again, the support available if you feel uncomfortable with the process is also something very helpful.
0
 
Corp_JonesAuthor Commented:
Thanks Guys, interesting feedback, your right about lots of changes in the swing migration method, i'm nearly done on my test swing migration for 2011 so I might as well finish it, I'll also try the MS way which is probably quicker and then see if swing migration is worth the extra time.

0
 
Glen KnightCommented:
Don't forget to try my guide :)
0
 
Corp_JonesAuthor Commented:
No problem, looks like a good guide!

I'll leave this open for a bit just in case someone else wants to add their experiences as might be useful for future ref.
0

Featured Post

Simplify Active Directory Administration

Administration of Active Directory does not have to be hard.  Too often what should be a simple task is made more difficult than it needs to be.The solution?  Hyena from SystemTools Software.  With ease-of-use as well as powerful importing and bulk updating capabilities.

  • 8
  • 5
  • 4
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now