Anyone Upgraded from Microsoft SBS 2003 to "real" 2003 Server?

[AZRedhawk44]

Sigh... I inherited a SBS server and I hate those friggin' things.

Got the go-ahead to convert to a more stable domain environment with multiple DC's and services distributed between multiple servers in preparation for VPN/remote computing environment coming up.

Need to migrate SBS to 2003.  I found out about the SBS 2003 Transition Pack.  Anyone have any "gotcha" stories to share? 

Goals are to preserve all information on existing SBS Server including Active Directory data.  Cannot run dcpromo on a second box for AD purposes until SBS is eliminated from the domain.

[lee n. field]

I've had to repair (ie, redo completely) a couple botched SBS installs (hint folks.  To set up SBS you must run the SBS install completely through to the end.  Do not set up the domain right after Windows finishes installing.  RTFM.  Grrrr.), but never done what you need to do.

Exchange server need migrating too?  How many users?

Can you back up system state with windows backup, then do a directory services restore to a regular 2003 server?  I'm guessing probably not, but might be worth a try.

[AZRedhawk44]

I've read that I can use ADMT to migrate AD to another 2003 server, but I don't have the budget for another server.

I'd be scared of some sort of proprietary AD/LDAP schema in SBS stopping me to just backup/restore system state from SBS to 2003.  I have yet to find any anecdotal experience of someone trying it and I don't want to be the first sucker.

About 25 users, Exchange will be staying where it is for right now.  It may be moved in the future if disk space becomes an issue.  I'm just really scared of having this one server fail someday and losing AD.  In a single DC environment that means our VPN/RAS server is offline and no one in the company will be able to work at all.

[mtnbkr]

I last worked with SBS in 2000.  Back then, there was no upgrade path from SBS to a "normal" NT4 environment, at least none that I recall.  It was designed as a single server system for small companies.  Of course, in the past 8 years, I'm sure that has changed...

Chris

[lee n. field]

About 25 users, Exchange will be staying where it is for right now.

If SBS2003 goes away, you have to buy and set up Exchange Server (and licenses) as well.  And Exchange 2007 is a completely different animal from 2000 and 2003 (got bit by that over the summer).

[41magsnub]

I used the transition pack once a couple of years ago for SBS 2003 to regular server/exchange and it went just fine.  I'm trying and failing to remember the particulars.  For the most part small businesses in MT fit just fine in the 75 user cap of SBS so it does not come up often for me.

I too have fixed a large number of massively screwed up SBS installs by other consultants.  Another hint...  use the freaking wizards in SBS at least for adding computers and users.  it is not as bad as it was in the 4.0/4.5 days where if the wizards were not used it pretty much broke the management, but still they make it a lot easier and more consistent.  This is where most of the animosity to SBS originates from.  The only really hard to fix mistake is when they name the AD domain the same as their public domain.  That annoys the hell out of me and causes so many problems.

Now..  I think you are selling SBS 2003 short.  If you are within the 75 user cap there is so much flexibility that I don't see what benefit switching away from it would get you.  If it were me I would upgrade to SBS 2003, add another DC for redundancy if you feel the need and stop.  Alternatively, if the server hardware is aging you might consider a migration to SBS 2008 on new hardware.  One note though, SBS 2008 is 64 bit so you would need to plan that accordingly.

You are now thinking "wait what?  multiple DC's?  He's on crack"  You can have multiple domain controllers in SBS, it is a common myth that you are restricted to one.  I can provide a source if you want, but I am right on this.  What messes people up is that there can only be one SBS server in a domain.  All other servers have to be standard server but they can be DCs or member servers.  There is a restriction in SBS that there cannot be any domain trusts and SBS needs to be the root of the forest, but that is it.

[lee n. field]

You can have multiple domain controllers in SBS, it is a common myth that you are restricted to one.  I can provide a source if you want, but I am right on this.  What messes people up is that there can only be one SBS server in a domain.  All other servers have to be standard server but they can be DCs or member servers.  There is a restriction in SBS that there cannot be any domain trusts and SBS needs to be the root of the forest, but that is it.

It hasn't come up for me, but I'd be interested in seeing that.

[41magsnub]

It hasn't come up for me, but I'd be interested in seeing that.

http://blogs.technet.com/sbs/archive/2007/10/04/debunking-the-myth-about-additional-domain-controllers-replica-dcs-in-an-sbs-domain.aspx

    *  You cannot have more than one Small Business Server in the same domain. This is most likely the main cause of confusion on the issue. You can have other DCs but none of them can be another Small Business Server.
    * You must take special steps to promote a Small Business Server into an existing Active Directory domain. I’ll go into more details on this later, but essentially because of the way that SBS is promoted as a DC in a new domain during the SBS integrated setup, it may not be immediately apparent how to successfully promote it into an existing domain. And with SBS 2000 you could not use the SBS media to do so, but rather had to use media for Standard Windows 2000 Server. Also, it is not supported to demote the Small Business Server after it is installed then promote it into another, existing domain.
    * The Small Business Server must own all of the forest and domain FSMO roles. Obviously only one DC in the forest can have this requirement.
    * The SBS domain must be the root domain of the forest and trusts or parent/child domains are not supported.

[41magsnub]

I'd be scared of some sort of proprietary AD/LDAP schema in SBS stopping me to just backup/restore system state from SBS to 2003.  I have yet to find any anecdotal experience of someone trying it and I don't want to be the first sucker.

Other than some extra wizards and the licensing restrictions about user caps and FSMO roles SBS 2003 is no different than regular server 2003.    SBS is perfect for a 25 user network. 

[AZRedhawk44]

Other than some extra wizards and the licensing restrictions about user caps and FSMO roles SBS 2003 is no different than regular server 2003.    SBS is perfect for a 25 user network. 

I don't like the vulnerability of Exchange/IIS/FTP/RAS/VPN going down all together on one box.  Now, it's good to hear that SBS 2003 can supposedly have a member 2003 server promoted to a DC.  That helps.  But it doesn't distribute my resources so that the desired redundancy is achieved.

And... we may be a 25 user network, but we're 25 software jockies and support staff for a software firm.  We have multiple computers, virtual PC's... all sorts of fun projects running around.  I've seen situations where we exceed the maximum supported 75 users.  It's a very high demand network.  SBS was a mistake in implementation from the get-go, as acknowledged by staff who have been here longer than I have been... It just needs to be fixed before we all depart for home office computing.

[41magsnub]

I don't like the vulnerability of Exchange/IIS/FTP/RAS/VPN going down all together on one box.  Now, it's good to hear that SBS 2003 can supposedly have a member 2003 server promoted to a DC.  That helps.  But it doesn't distribute my resources so that the desired redundancy is achieved.

And... we may be a 25 user network, but we're 25 software jockies and support staff for a software firm.  We have multiple computers, virtual PC's... all sorts of fun projects running around.  I've seen situations where we exceed the maximum supported 75 users.  It's a very high demand network.  SBS was a mistake in implementation from the get-go, as acknowledged by staff who have been here longer than I have been... It just needs to be fixed before we all depart for home office computing.

Well, do whatever you want but please research your preconceived notions first before assuming about the restrictions.  FTP, File Services, DHCP, DNS, RRAS, IIS, VPN, and any other windows service can also be on any server box in the domain without caveat.  The only thing you can't move is exchange, but you can buy an additional exchange server license and have it on another box in the domain and run two exchange servers if 25 users could possibly justify multiple exchange servers.

The migration up to standalone products will be spendy and probably a waste but not my business or problem so have at it.  The transition pack does work well and there is not much in the way of penalty for using it, the cost is roughly the difference of if you had bought standalone products in the first place.

[Azrael256]

The only thing you can't move is exchange, but you can buy an additional exchange server license and have it on another box in the domain and run two exchange servers if 25 users could possibly justify multiple exchange servers.

You can't move your existing SBS Exchange licenses, but moving the data is brain-dead simple.  Exchange moves are easy.  This whole thing is easy.  If your users can suffer through losing calendar linkage and OOF rules, it can be done in two hours if the new boxes have an OS on them.

And really, Exchange 2k7 only differs from 2k3 in how it handles transport.  All of the major difficulties in 2k7 come from having to learn powershell.

ETA: The only reason I saw in your list thst really justifies a move is user CALs.  If you're at 75 users, then move.  If not, do your system state and IS backups and don't worry.

If you do move, raise your right hand and repeat after me:
I will not put Exchange on a DC.
I will not use network-stored PSTs.
I will exclude all databases AND THEIR LOGFILES from AV (hint: DHCP, AD, and Exchange are all the same database).
A SAN snapshot is NOT a backup.

That'll knock off 90% of your calls to PSS.