Re: Different DFS versions together?

R2 is the latest - greatest. You should use DFSR. DFSR (R2) will not work
without the partner being R2 also. You can update the Win 2k3 server to R2
by running setup2 from the second disk of the R2 set. It just updates
features.

hth
DDS

"Marcus Dempsey" <> wrote in message
news:778E7A3F-E02E-4A5C-99BF-...
> Hello,
>
> I'm just wondering if you can safely run 2 different versions of DFS
> together, I have a number of servers I want to implement DFS on, however
> some
> of the servers are Windows 2003 and some are Windows 2003 R2.
>
> My DC's which are the name servers are Windows 2003 R2.
>
> Anyone ran this before, any issues encountered?
>
> Marcus

On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 07:09:16 -0600, "Danny Sanders"
<> wrote:

>R2 is the latest - greatest. You should use DFSR. DFSR (R2) will not work
>without the partner being R2 also. You can update the Win 2k3 server to R2
>by running setup2 from the second disk of the R2 set. It just updates
>features.

This refers to replication (DFSR). The name space is quite compatible.
I believe that R2 can do dfs replication but the R2 DFSR is so much better you
should upgrade all servers. W2k3 is like a bicycle compared to the R2 Ferrari
>
>hth
>DDS
>
>"Marcus Dempsey" <> wrote in message
>news:778E7A3F-E02E-4A5C-99BF-...
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm just wondering if you can safely run 2 different versions of DFS
>> together, I have a number of servers I want to implement DFS on, however
>> some
>> of the servers are Windows 2003 and some are Windows 2003 R2.
>>
>> My DC's which are the name servers are Windows 2003 R2.
>>
>> Anyone ran this before, any issues encountered?
>>
>> Marcus
>
--
Dave Mills
There are 10 types of people, those that understand binary and those that don't.