Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Child Domains vs Sites - a philosophical question

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Child Domains vs Sites - a philosophical question

    As many of you know, I'm doing most of my work with an international company with 4 main and 10 subsidiary locations around the world. There are c. 300 main users at the moment and will be perhaps 1000 in total once I've finished integrating everything. There appears to be reasonable bandwidth (ADSL at least) everywhere.

    My first plan was to create a root domain with 4 child domains under it, then use AD sites to group the remaining locations to the appropriate children. I've set up a test environment and it works fine, but the thought struck me:
    Is child domains the best way to do or should I just have sites in the one root domain.

    There are no particular different security requirements between locations, Exchange and a mission critical dB application will be centralised. Some data will be local to each location while some will be shared, so DFS is a strong possibility. Everyone will have a corporate email address with (legacy) local addresses that can be rolled out through Exchange recipient policies and RPC/HTTP will allow everyone to get worldwide access to their email.

    So, the question for today is:
    Are child domains a better option than sites in a single domain?
    Please explain your answer. (You have all three lifelines remaining)
    Tom Jones
    MCT, MCSE (2000:Security & 2003), MCSA:Security & Messaging, MCDBA, MCDST, MCITP(EA, EMA, SA, EDA, ES, CS), MCTS, MCP, Sec+
    PhD, MSc, FIAP, MIITT
    IT Trainer / Consultant
    Ossian Ltd
    Scotland

    ** Remember to give credit where credit is due and leave reputation points where appropriate **

  • #2
    Re: Child Domains vs Sites - a philosophical question

    Child domains are good if:

    1. The child sites will have their own DC and want their own domain.
    2. Have a completely different account or password policy
    3. The users in child domain will not use ANY facilities in the parent domain, need to login to parent domain or work in the location in the parent domain
    4. Replication is a big issue if connection to main office is v. slow (eg dial up modem)

    Sites are good if:
    1. Management is easier as you only have a single domain to administer and you do not need login accounts in the child domains as well.
    2. The branch sites are on seperate sub nets so they can access seperated as a Site and access local resources.
    3. If all users use the same resources esp. in main office
    4. If network speed is good then you can control and schedule replication updates between DCs.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Child Domains vs Sites - a philosophical question

      I would recommend the ussage of sites.
      Simple and central management.

      As MS like to say "keep it simple", and they recommend to use a single forest\domain whenever possible.

      PJhutch allready lined out he key bennefits of ussing sites vs domains.
      [Powershell]
      Start-DayDream
      Set-Location Malibu Beach
      Get-Drink
      Lay-Back
      Start-Sleep
      ....
      Wake-Up!
      Resume-Service
      Write-Warning
      [/Powershell]

      BLOG: Therealshrimp.blogspot.com

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Child Domains vs Sites - a philosophical question

        More or less my thinking as well, but I'm going to sleep on it before making the final decision
        Tom Jones
        MCT, MCSE (2000:Security & 2003), MCSA:Security & Messaging, MCDBA, MCDST, MCITP(EA, EMA, SA, EDA, ES, CS), MCTS, MCP, Sec+
        PhD, MSc, FIAP, MIITT
        IT Trainer / Consultant
        Ossian Ltd
        Scotland

        ** Remember to give credit where credit is due and leave reputation points where appropriate **

        Comment

        Working...
        X