Windows 2003 Server function level could not be raised

Discussion in 'Server Setup' started by John, Aug 13, 2005.

  1. John

    John Guest

    I tried to raise Windows 2003 function level to native mode by going into
    active directory trust or active directory computers and users

    I get the following error: function level could not be raised. The error:
    directory service is busy

    any idea's on how to get past this error?
    John, Aug 13, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Functional level increases require FSMOs; the PDC is required for domain
    func. level increases and the schema for forest increases. FSMOs must
    meet a requirement at boot known as INITSYNC, which simplified means
    they must replicate successfully with a domain partner if they're the
    PDC FSMO or a domain-or-forest partner if they're the schema FSMO. I'd
    suggest running DSSITE.MSC and forcing replication before trying again.
    Dean Wells [MVP], Aug 13, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. John

    John Guest

    I must be missing something, as I can't find where to force replication!

    Also, I noticed on both servers I'm getting no more end points messages in
    the event log... Wonder if that is the source of my problem
    about changing the functional level?

    John, Aug 13, 2005
  4. No more endpoints is generally an indication of a DNS related
    configuration error which will in turn inhibit replication which will
    prevent the afore mentioned INITSYNC requirement from being met and,
    subsequently, the FSMOs in question will not service their assigned role
    .... at this point, failing to raise the functional level should be a
    secondary concern.

    Please describe your forest structure -

    1. # of domains
    2. # of DCs
    3. # of DNS servers
    4. which DNS servers the DCs point toward

    Dean Wells [MVP / Directory Services]
    [[ Please respond to the Newsgroup only regarding posts ]]
    R e m o v e t h e m a s k t o s e n d e m a i l
    Dean Wells [MVP], Aug 14, 2005
  5. John

    John Guest

    1. # of domains
    one domain
    2 DC (a and b)
    1 dns server
    a has DNS installed, and is pointing to itself under tcp/ip
    properties, from there the DNS server has forwarding turn on.
    b has no DNS installed and is pointing to a for DNS resolutions.

    Event Type: Error
    Event Source: Userenv
    Event Category: None
    Event ID: 1053
    Date: 8/14/2005
    Time: 12:30:00 AM
    Computer: B
    Windows cannot determine the user or computer name. (There are no more
    endpoints available from the endpoint mapper. ). Group Policy processing

    Event Type: Warning
    Event Source: NTDS Replication
    Event Category: Replication
    Event ID: 1586
    Date: 8/13/2005
    Time: 4:22:32 AM
    Computer: B
    The Windows NT 4.0 or earlier replication checkpoint with the PDC emulator
    master was unsuccessful.

    A full synchronization of the security accounts manager (SAM) database to
    domain controllers running Windows NT 4.0 and earlier might take place if
    the PDC emulator master role is transferred to the local domain controller
    before the next successful checkpoint.

    The checkpoint process will be tried again in four hours.

    Additional Data
    Error value:
    1753 There are no more endpoints available from the endpoint mapper.

    These above errors are on

    Event Type: Error
    Event Source: NTDS Replication
    Event Category: Replication
    Event ID: 1864
    Date: 8/13/2005
    Time: 7:01:54 PM
    Computer: A
    This is the replication status for the following directory partition on the
    local domain controller.

    Directory partition:

    The local domain controller has not recently received replication
    information from a number of domain controllers. The count of domain
    controllers is shown, divided into the following intervals.

    More than 24 hours:
    More than a week:
    More than one month:
    More than two months:
    More than a tombstone lifetime:
    Tombstone lifetime (days):
    Domain controllers that do not replicate in a timely manner may encounter
    errors. It may miss password changes and be unable to authenticate. A DC
    that has not replicated in a tombstone lifetime may have missed the deletion
    of some objects, and may be automatically blocked from future replication
    until it is reconciled.

    To identify the domain controllers by name, install the support tools
    included on the installation CD and run dcdiag.exe.
    You can also use the support tool repadmin.exe to display the replication
    latencies of the domain controllers in the forest. The command is
    "repadmin /showvector /latency <partition-dn>".

    Event Type: Warning
    Event Source: NTDS Replication
    Event Category: Replication
    Event ID: 2092
    Date: 8/13/2005
    Time: 7:01:54 PM
    Computer: A

    This server is the owner of the following FSMO role, but does not consider
    it valid. For the partition which contains the FSMO, this server has not
    replicated successfully with any of its partners since this server has been
    restarted. Replication errors are preventing validation of this role.

    Operations which require contacting a FSMO operation master will fail until
    this condition is corrected.

    FSMO Role: DC=abc,DC=com

    User Action:

    1. Initial synchronization is the first early replications done by a system
    as it is starting. A failure to initially synchronize may explain why a FSMO
    role cannot be validated. This process is explained in KB article 305476.
    2. This server has one or more replication partners, and replication is
    failing for all of these partners. Use the command repadmin /showrepl to
    display the replication errors. Correct the error in question. For example
    there maybe problems with IP connectivity, DNS name resolution, or security
    authentication that are preventing successful replication.
    3. In the rare event that all replication partners being down is an expected
    occurance, perhaps because of maintenance or a disaster recovery, you can
    force the role to be validated. This can be done by using NTDSUTIL.EXE to
    seize the role to the same server. This may be done using the steps provided
    in KB articles 255504 and 324801 on

    The following operations may be impacted:
    Schema: You will no longer be able to modify the schema for this forest.
    Domain Naming: You will no longer be able to add or remove domains from this
    PDC: You will no longer be able to perform primary domain controller
    operations, such as Group Policy updates and password resets for non-Active
    Directory accounts.
    RID: You will not be able to allocation new security identifiers for new
    user accounts, computer accounts or security groups.
    Infrastructure: Cross-domain name references, such as universal group
    memberships, will not be updated properly if their target object is moved or

    These errors above are from



    John, Aug 14, 2005
  6. Your DCs have not replicated with one another in over 2 months,
    obviously this is not a good scenario since changes introduced on one
    will not have reached the other ... were this the sole problem, fixing
    replication would solve everything ... this is no longer a solution
    since objects that were deleted on one DC and have since been purged
    (following a 60 day period known as the tombstone lifecycle) continue to
    exist on the other.

    Assuming you'd like to maintain both DCs, two fault resolution
    approaches exist both of which involve addressing the causal factor,
    that being DNS:

    1) forcibly demote and metadata clean one of the DCs
    * some loss of data within Active Directory is
    * fix DNS on the remaining DC
    * repromote the old DC

    2) fix DNS and permit replication to function between the
    two DCs again
    * lingering objects are inevitable
    - objects that exist on one DC and not the other
    * cleanup the lingering objects
    - loss of data is possible due to confusion caused by
    objects assumed already deleted and later modified

    Which approach do you prefer? In a larger environment I would most
    always advise the use of option 1, however, the size of your directory
    service permits option 2 without much cause for concern.

    Dean Wells [MVP / Directory Services]
    [[ Please respond to the Newsgroup only regarding posts ]]
    R e m o v e t h e m a s k t o s e n d e m a i l
    Dean Wells [MVP], Aug 14, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.