Re: Dot Local Vs Dot Com Domain in AD

Keep the TLD to three letters or less ("loc" instead of "local")

Whether the Domain Name is spelled the same as the public Domain Name is up
to you. You will probably have to run Split-DNS eventually either way. But
the AD Domain Name and the Public Domain name have absolutely no
relationship to each other at all in any way,...the onely thing they have in
comming is they are both call "domain names".

--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------

"Wayne Smith" <> wrote in message
news:21F2F7B2-FE26-4A82-8864-...
Applies to Windows Server 2003 Standard

Hi everyone,
I'm in the process of setting up a new server installation which will
incorporate AD, DNS & DHCP on one server, Exchange 2003 on a second server
and IIS for website hosting on a third server.

My question relates to configuring the first server with Active Directory,
if the company is called ABC Inc and the registered Internet Domain name for
that company is abc.com, what are the benefits (if any) of configuring
Active Directory as abc.local.

The company currently uses Windows Small Business Server 2003 and I've read
a lot of documentation within that OS that best practice is to configure AD
using the .local domain, but I'm not sure if the same 'Best Practice'
applies to a brand new clean installation using Windows Server 2003. Can
someone explain to me exactly what is 'protected' by using the .local domain
in AD? if I'm hosting websites on the third server with IIS and
sending/receiving email with Exchange 2003 on server 2, what is the point of
using the .local domain in AD on server 1?

Somewhere along the line I anticipate that Routing & Remote Access will also
be configured and mobile users will require access to the company internal
network, would I be inadvertently blocking that access if I use the .local
domain in Active Directory?

Sorry to be a little vain on this subject but I have tried to search the
Internet for the benefits and even what the purpose of using the .local
domain is but I haven't really found any compelling information that leads
me to believe this is absolutely necessary, unless someone can convince me
otherwise?

Thanks in advance
Wayne

Hi,

One thing I like about using the public domain name for the AD domain name,
is that users have one less thing to remember: their login name. Because it
is the same than their e-mail address, which they usually remember. When
they try to log onto any workstation and they call support to know their
login name, we just tell them "type in your e-mail address".

ThePro

"Phillip Windell" <> wrote:
> Keep the TLD to three letters or less ("loc" instead of "local")
>
> Whether the Domain Name is spelled the same as the public Domain Name is
> up to you. You will probably have to run Split-DNS eventually either way.
> But the AD Domain Name and the Public Domain name have absolutely no
> relationship to each other at all in any way,...the onely thing they have
> in comming is they are both call "domain names".
>
> --
> Phillip Windell
> www.wandtv.com
>
> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or
> Microsoft,
> or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> "Wayne Smith" <> wrote in message
> news:21F2F7B2-FE26-4A82-8864-...
> Applies to Windows Server 2003 Standard
>
> Hi everyone,
> I'm in the process of setting up a new server installation which will
> incorporate AD, DNS & DHCP on one server, Exchange 2003 on a second server
> and IIS for website hosting on a third server.
>
> My question relates to configuring the first server with Active Directory,
> if the company is called ABC Inc and the registered Internet Domain name
> for that company is abc.com, what are the benefits (if any) of configuring
> Active Directory as abc.local.
>
> The company currently uses Windows Small Business Server 2003 and I've
> read a lot of documentation within that OS that best practice is to
> configure AD using the .local domain, but I'm not sure if the same 'Best
> Practice' applies to a brand new clean installation using Windows Server
> 2003. Can someone explain to me exactly what is 'protected' by using the
> .local domain in AD? if I'm hosting websites on the third server with IIS
> and sending/receiving email with Exchange 2003 on server 2, what is the
> point of using the .local domain in AD on server 1?
>
> Somewhere along the line I anticipate that Routing & Remote Access will
> also be configured and mobile users will require access to the company
> internal network, would I be inadvertently blocking that access if I use
> the .local domain in Active Directory?
>
> Sorry to be a little vain on this subject but I have tried to search the
> Internet for the benefits and even what the purpose of using the .local
> domain is but I haven't really found any compelling information that leads
> me to believe this is absolutely necessary, unless someone can convince me
> otherwise?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Wayne
>

"ThePro" <> wrote in message
news:6C3EA094-5693-4934-B981-...
> One thing I like about using the public domain name for the AD domain
> name, is that users have one less thing to remember:

I don't do that here.
But, yes, that is usually why people do it.

You'll have to setup Split-DNS. It will use a single Zone (AD Zone).
When the names are different it uses two Zones, one for each name,...but the
theory is the same beyond that.


--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------