Please Read: Significant Update Planned, Migrating Forum Software This Month

See more
See less

GPO not applying consistently + weird object

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GPO not applying consistently + weird object


    We have 2 2008 R2 DCs and 2 2003 R2 DCs in our domain. Our current domain functionnal level is Windows Server 2003. We have a fair amount of GPOs configured and most of them were done by the former sysadmin.

    The problem that we are getting now (and it has been this way for a while) is that some policies (or maybe all) don't apply to their targets in a consistent manner. For example, I created recently a GPO to install and configure Chrome on a subset of our domain computers. About 90% of the deployment went fine , and the rest didn't get Chrome installed. However, when I installed Chrome manually on it, it caught the GPO parameters. So I did some reports in Group Policy Results and I had different results on different computers that should be the same (they are in the AD security group that I created specifically for this GPO). One computer had in its result that it the Google Chrome GPO would apply, one had that it was denied because it is inaccessible, and the last one didn't have the Chrome GPO in the report.

    Something that makes me think that our GPO system is kind of broken is that there is one object labeled [Name not available] and when I click on it to see details I get this error message:An error occurred while generating report:
    The DFS path "{0}" is not valid.

    We do have many policies in the default domain policies and I know it is not recommended to edit the this object, but it was there when I started working here.

    Any ideas of what I could do to troubleshoot further?

    Last edited by ubellavance; 7th November 2013, 17:59.

  • #2
    Re: GPO not applying consistently + weird object

    Would be worth reviewing the health of the Domain and even point GPMC manually to each server to see if you are unable to access GPOs or spot some inconsistencies on some of the DCs.