samba - Jun 2018 - Erro Transfer Fsmo(DNS)

But, if you use the "seizi" dc that no longer has the FSMO should be 
removed from the network, right?

Regards;


On 06-06-2018 11:36, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 11:24:33 -0300
> Carlos via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> The problem with this is that both Dcs will continue on the
>> network ... I wanted to transfer the FSMOs, because in DC (that has
>> today) I will perform an S.O. upgrade and if something goes wrong, it
>> is already correct !!!
>>
> Something already has gone wrong, for some reason it cannot find the
> FSMO role owner.
>
> This is no reason not to seize the roles, it may in fact fix your
> problem.
>
> Rowland
>

On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 14:45:03 -0300
Carlos via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> But, if you use the "seizi" dc that no longer has the FSMO should
be
> removed from the network, right?
> 
No, what ever gave you that idea ?
It is true that seizing is mostly used when a DC has died and you
should use 'transfer' where possible, but, as in your case, you can use
'seize' if needed and keep the DC you are seizing from.

Rowland

Hi!

In wiki -> 
https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Transferring_and_Seizing_FSMO_Roles#Difference_of_Transferring_and_Seizing_FSMO_Roles

"If the DC is broken (e. g. hardware defect) and will never come back 
again, then you can seize the role on a remaining DC. It is very 
important that the old DC will never be connected to the network again, 
if it is connected again, this will cause conflicts and lead to an 
inconsistent AD. This is because the old DC will not notice the change 
and still feel responsible for tasks related to the role."

In my case, the problem is not hardware, but maintenance, but both 
servers will be connected ....

Regards


On 06-06-2018 14:58, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 14:45:03 -0300
> Carlos via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
>
>> But, if you use the "seizi" dc that no longer has the FSMO
should be
>> removed from the network, right?
>>
> No, what ever gave you that idea ?
> It is true that seizing is mostly used when a DC has died and you
> should use 'transfer' where possible, but, as in your case, you can
use
> 'seize' if needed and keep the DC you are seizing from.
>
> Rowland
>   
>
>