search for: unavialability

...that also. Greetz, Louis > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens > Zhuchenko Valery via samba > Verzonden: dinsdag 14 april 2020 10:38 > Aan: samba at lists.samba.org > Onderwerp: [Samba] maximum ad domain controller unavialability time > > Hi, all. > > What is greatest period for AD DC (non FSMO) can be unavailable, for > example, because network segment is unavailable for long time > (3, 4 weeks)? > Is the controller will be removed from AD automatically? > And what to do after this network segmen...

...is > >> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- >> Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens >> Zhuchenko Valery via samba >> Verzonden: dinsdag 14 april 2020 10:38 >> Aan: samba at lists.samba.org >> Onderwerp: [Samba] maximum ad domain controller unavialability time >> >> Hi, all. >> >> What is greatest period for AD DC (non FSMO) can be unavailable, for >> example, because network segment is unavailable for long time >> (3, 4 weeks)? >> Is the controller will be removed from AD automatically? >> And what t...

HI Valery A DC is never "removed" automatically from AD, but, at least from the Windows perspective, the longest period would be the tombstone lifetime. After this has passed, the DC would have objects "lingering", as the deletion of an object could have already occurred at other DCs and then the marker of the deletion itself removed, which of course means there is no way

Hi, all. What is greatest period for AD DC (non FSMO) can be unavailable, for example, because network segment is unavailable for long time (3, 4 weeks)? Is the controller will be removed from AD automatically? And what to do after this network segment will become available? I have read about tombstoneLifeTime attribute of Directory Service (Configuration, Services, Windows NT), which default

Hi Folks, I am trying to get my wireless network card work under dom0 of XEN. I could successfully install the ndiswrapper drivers and could see it being associated to AP. However I amn''t able to transmit any packets outbound. I could''nt even ping the AP. Interestingly when I run a tcpdump I can see few broadcast packets on the interface. There no rules in iptables for nat or

I have a question - if a user calls up w/ blocked caller id I get the following on my phone Incoming call from asterisk This is the same on my Cisco 7940s and Polycom phones. For average users this is not intuitive at all.. I'd like to configure this so if I deploy this at a customer site it says "caller id unavialable". With the spelling done right.... Any ideas on how this

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83 Summary: fork() fails when there are PAM limits set Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 3.0.2p1 Platform: ix86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: sshd AssignedTo: openssh-unix-dev at mindrot.org ReportedBy:

I tried it w/ mine as well and it hung up on me because I just have Voicemail running not Voicemail2. It seems as though you have Voicemail2 because it's trying to play the Unavialable message. Just a thought though. Does it do the samething w/ [qout-phillyq] exten => 0,1,Voicemail(u1) exten => 0,2,Goto(default,s,1) Tim Thompson http://www.amatechtel.com (806) 722-2227

Hello, I have the exact same problem as mentioned in this post,(http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2005-06/msg00221.html) (or see the bottom of this post) Yet the conversation was continued elsewhere, is this a bug or somthing stupid.. or more importantly is there a solution? Thanks! ~Rob ---(Quote From Archives)--- "Hi Folks, I am trying to get my wireless network card