Link to home
Create AccountLog in
Avatar of PhilPorritt
PhilPorrittFlag for Australia

asked on

Killing off DFS

Hi All,

Need some assistance in removing some remainants of DFS from my servers. These are servers I play about on before implementing things on client sites & I did play with DFS on them some time back.

Here's how the issue was detected. I whent to remove a share called "H" from ItServer2, & received this message:-

User generated image
Got the impression that DFSUTIL might be the answer to killing this off but not sure if I'm on the right track or not.

Tried a few things as seen below but none seem to be correct.

User generated image
Thanks

Phil

PS. IitServer is 2003 & a domain controller, ItServer2 is 2008 & was a domain controller too but is presently demoted.

From memory I think I originally setup DFS on the 2003 when I last played with it.

Cheers.
Avatar of motnahp00
motnahp00
Flag of United States of America image

Do you still have a replication group configured?

From your DFS server -> Server Manager -> File Services -> Replication -> Right click an associated Replication Group and delete.
Avatar of PhilPorritt

ASKER

motnahp00 Posted on 2012-05-30 at 01:18:51ID: 38025256
Rank: Sage
Do you still have a replication group configured?

From your DFS server -> Server Manager -> File Services -> Replication -> Right click an associated Replication Group and delete.

Not on the 2003 server where I originally setup DFS.

What I do see on the 2008 server is this:-

User generated image
Note I only installed DFS on the 2008 box a few days back.
Previous stuff on the 2003 box was 12 months or more ago.
SOLUTION
Avatar of motnahp00
motnahp00
Flag of United States of America image

Link to home
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
See answer
SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
Yep Domain Admins have full permissions in both sharing & NTFS.

Seems Active Directory contains invalid records that I can't see.
DNS configured to point to all DCs?

Run this on a DC and make sure you do not see any replication issues:

repadmin /syncall
Also verify that your DCs are role holder aware with the following command:

netdom query fsmo
Microsoft Windows [Version 5.2.3790]
(C) Copyright 1985-2003 Microsoft Corp.

C:\>netdom query fsmo
Schema owner                iitserver.inverellit.local

Domain role owner           iitserver.inverellit.local

PDC role                    iitserver.inverellit.local

RID pool manager            iitserver.inverellit.local

Infrastructure owner        iitserver.inverellit.local

The command completed successfully.


C:\>

ITSERVER2 is nolonger a domain controller.
Do you by chance have another DC available?
Just thought of another idea. Do you have any objections to removing the Role Service?
Remove the Role Service?
You mean remove DFS from BOTH servers?

That is not a problem as my intententionsis  to have a fresh look at DFS in relation to a current job.
Yes, remove the role service from any member servers associated with the namespace.

A clean slate might be a good starting point.
Looks like removing the DFS Service has the same issue.
Somewhere in Active Still thinks there is a something.

This was removing it from the 2008 box:-

User generated image
Somehow I think this is roughly relevant...

http://www.itechtalk.com/thread3193.html
Think I need to identify the namespaces that were previously hosted on either of the servers & manually remove them. possibly with dfsutil.

How can this information be retreived from Active Directory?
What are the list of shares on that server?

net share
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
Wow, good detective work!
Issue was identified in a different area than originally discussed.