Adding 2012 R2 Domain controller in 2008 R2 domain

Hello,

We have two DC both are running 2008 R2

DC1 - All FSMO roles, AD integrated DNS (VM)

DC2 - DC, AD integrated DNS (VM)

SRV1 - DHCP windows 2003 (VM)

I want to add 2012 R2 (Physical) as DC and want to move DHCP to 2012 R2 server.

Need to migrate FRS to DFSR.

Show question is should I migrate FRS to DFSR first before adding another DC running 2012 R2 or after adding it?

or add 2012 R2 first then move DHCP to 2012 R2 and then migrate FRS to DFSR?

Instructions to migrate FRS from another SW topic https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2014/06/25/streamlined-migration-of-frs-to-dfsr-sysvol/

Can you also provide me working instructions on migrating DHCP from 2003 to 2012?
Also, I need to add processor on existing DC servers which are VM any issues doing that specially on DC? I have tested on another 2008 server and did not cause any issues?

Thank you
LVL 1
Nirav04Asked:
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

x
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Cliff GaliherCommented:
First, for future reference, you really should ask these as separate questions. Migrating DHCP from 2003 is a different skillset, and a different answer, than migrating FRS.  If someone gave you a bad answer for one, but a good answer for another, does accepting their answer as "the answer" make sense?  Not really...

Answers, in my opinion:

Since both of your DCs are 2008 R2 already, migrate to DFS-R before introducing a new DC.  DFS-R is *much* better than FRS and you have a lower risk of problems when you do eventually introduce a new DC.

I'd migrate DHCP before doing *anything* else.  Get that 2003 server off your network. It is already two years too late.

Once you have the 2003 server gone, then do DFS-R, then introduce your new DC.

Migrating DHCP is easy.  I googled it.  Googling is a good skill to learn. https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/canitpro/2013/04/28/step-by-step-migration-of-dhcp-from-windows-server-2003-to-windows-server-2012/

Adding a processor to a VM in Hyper-V is a non-issue for DCs.  I'm not a VMWare guy, but I can't think it'd be a problem there either. But I can't say that with 100% certainty.

With that said, I wouldn't usually bother.  Domain controllers are not CPU intensive. Their bottlenecks lie elsewhere. I doubt you'd see any benefit. Have you actually used performance metrics to decide if this is necessary?!?
Nirav04Author Commented:
You are correct I should have created separate questions, I will remember this in future.

I did google it but getting two separate methods and I wasn't sure which method should I use, first using netsh link you provided and second using migration tool https://www.petri.com/windows-server-2003-dhcp-migration-2012

As far as the processor is concerned this VM is running on a single processor with 1 core and they have this way for quite a while now, recently we had added SSO agent for our firewall so it checks auth using logon events which is a little processor intensive.
Cliff GaliherCommented:
I'd still do performance monitoring. If it is that intensive, it is probably a bigger issue that  just adding vCPUs.
Big Business Goals? Which KPIs Will Help You

The most successful MSPs rely on metrics – known as key performance indicators (KPIs) – for making informed decisions that help their businesses thrive, rather than just survive. This eBook provides an overview of the most important KPIs used by top MSPs.

Lee W, MVPTechnology and Business Process AdvisorCommented:
While I agree for the most part with Cliff I would still add the second CPU to the DC but understand, I'm 99% certain this will not benefit you in any noticeable way at least 99% of the time.  My own philosophy on systems is that ALL systems should be allocated 2 vCPU to start except in rare circumstances.  This is because I have seen processes go nuts one too many times and when they do, they hog the CPU and can make the system unusable.  Accidental or bad programming, it doesn't matter.  You don't want ANY system to come to a halt because one process goes nuts.  HOWEVER, I strongly agree that DCs are LOW RESOURCE and the additional CPU will almost certainly do no OBVIOUS good.

Further, BE CAREFUL about adding CPUs.  Allocate too many to a VM and you can HURT performance.  While it's an old article, it still applies:
http://www.zdnet.com/article/virtual-cpus-the-overprovisioning-penalty-of-vcpu-to-pcpu-ratios/

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
65tdRetiredCommented:
How many processors currently on he VMs?

I find it,s better to have two vCPU,s on a Windows virtual Windows server ( in VMWare ESXi).
Nirav04Author Commented:
Currently, both DC have one vCPU.
Nirav04Author Commented:
Successfully added second vCPU and performance is much better. Thank you for everyone's help.
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Windows Server 2012

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.