how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD?

Tutorials Win: Microsoft Windows Forum

- Previous
 - 1
 - Removing an old user from Active Directory? Is there anything special that needs to be done when removing a user from Active Directory Users and Computers? Remove seems too simple. I am sure there will be "junk" lying about. Thanks. Oh Windows 2000 SP 4 Advanced Server. -- George Hester _________________________________ Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176307
 - 2
 - Help! I just inatalled Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 on my laptop and i made a new virtual disk and it wont boot! it keeps saying " Reboot and select proper boot device or insert boot media in selected boot device" What do i do?? Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176304
 - 3
 - big problem with active directory I made a mistake and now don't have any user without active directory restrictions the problem is that i have the Adminstrator password, but the desktop is like the same desktop of all the other users, is there any way to undo this, or to somehow enter de users and move the administrator back to a folder without restrictions. Please i need help Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176302
 - 4
 - External Associated Account Greetings All, I am in a bit of a jam, I am new to scripting and I am trying to figure out how I can script the "Associated External Account" in Exchange to a account in a trusted domain and not the usual "SELF" account. Ideally the script would call a input file such as a txt file or csv since I am trying to perform a batch modify of about 500 users at a time. I have found several articles and scripts that perform the function individually but not a batch method. I am having trouble trying to tie it in with a input file, I am a newbie when it comes to scripting so bear with me. Any help or direction would be kindly appreciated. Thank you. Vid Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176301
 - 5
 - External Associated Account Greetings All, I am in a bit of a jam, I am new to scripting and I am trying to figure out how I can script the "Associated External Account" in Exchange to a account in a trusted domain and not the usual "SELF" account. Ideally the script would call a input file such as a txt file or csv since I am trying to perform a batch modify of about 500 users at a time. I have found several articles and scripts that perform the function individually but not a batch method. I am having trouble trying to tie it in with a input file, I am a newbie when it comes to scripting so bear with me. Any help or direction would be kindly appreciated. Thank you. Vid Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176300
 - 6
 - M'I.5,Per secution , BB C N ewscasters Li e & Deny The yre Wa tching Me MI5 Persecution: BBC Newscasters. Lie & Deny They're Watching Me Central to the persecution campaign waged against me. for some nine years now by. the Security Service is their use of the media, and in particular the broadcast media, to make clear to me that I am. under surveillance and being watched within my own home, even. by BBC newscasters while they read the news. This is really an act of arrogance; MI5. and their tools in the television and radio are so sure. that they can never be caught, that they have many. times made explicity clear on broadcast programmes that they are as capable of. seeing me as I am of seeing the broadcast pictures. Even when they have known I am taping the programmes. they still carry on this practice; for examples. of TVand radio presenters caught "in action", see the Evidence area of my. website. If you wish. to reply to this article...... then please include your name and fax number! I provide the means. for recipients. to send me their thoughts on the topics discussed, but ask that you. provide me with your fax number or email address if you require a response. Also would you please send not more than one or. two pages, if by fax.. Thank-you! It. started with a Newscaster, and it continues with Newscasters today The very first. incident in the story started with a reaction by an ITN newscaster, Sue Carpenter, in June of 1990, almost nine years ago. now. She reacted to what she. saw in my living room at home as she read the news. My mother. had brought an apple for me into the room, whereupon the newsreader smirked and giggled, apparently finding this funny. I. couldn't believe what I was seeing. I. carried on watching news and other television programmes to see if presenters would. show signs of "interactive watching"; to my surprise, this happened again and again.. Unfortunately, I did not have my wits sufficiently about me to videotape these. programmes, and it is. now almost impossible to obtain recordings dating back to 1990. However, I have. been busy recording everything Ive watched the last couple of years, and the taping has yielded some nuggets, which you will. find if you. point your Web browser at the "evidence" area of my website, whose URL address is given above. Strangely it is. not particularly the BBC who are "after me" at the moment (with the. exception of occasional fire from Nicholas. Witchell), but that supposed paragon of virtue and decency Jon Snow. of Channel Four TV News (he actually works for ITN), who once claimed hed turned down MI5s offer of a tax-free salary. I will cover. Snows recent actions in a future. article. BBCs. Hidden Shame The first ever Usenet post (internet newsgroup article) on. the subject of the MI5 bugging / BBC watching occurred,. as stated in a previous article, in early May 1995. It. is reproduced here; Date: Thu May. 4 18:27:24 1995 Newsgroups:. alt.conspiracy Subject: BBC's Hidden. Shame Remember the two-way televisions in George. Orwell's 1984? The ones which watched you back? Which you could never get. rid of, only the sound could be turned. down? Well. the country which brought Orwell into the world has made his nightmare follow into the world after him. Since 1990. the British have been waging war against one of their own citizens. using surveillance to invade privacy and a campaign of abuse in the transmitted. media in their efforts to humiliate. their "victim". I suppose "BBCs Hidden Shame" is more. of a wish than a fact. It may be hidden, but the BBC and other media and security organisations seem. to have no shame whatever in their. anti-social, not to say criminal, actions. Nor do. the general public, who seem quite happy to parrot the vilest. obscenities without much hesitation or apparently thought. Martyn Lewis, Nicholas Witchell and. the rest Most of the harassment occurred in 1990-92, when I. wasnt making any recordings, and the BBC wont. release copies of current affairs programmes from that. period.... so although I can remember there were many incidents in that. time, even many specifics, I cant dig up the actual programmes to flesh. out the bones. This year, there. has been at least one incident with Nicholas Witchell as newsreader, which I have. successfully recorded and digitized, i.e. converted into a computer Quicktime movie file.. This has not yet found its way onto my website (Im a busy man, dontcha. know) but you can be sure I will let. the readership of these articles know when that clip makes it onto the web.. The Witchell clip was recorded on Saturday 10 April 1999 at. 7pm, and shows Witchell trying to restrain his features from collapsing into a smirk. First his upper lip quivers for several. minutes, then with the non-excuse of a non-joke. his entire face twists into a grin. It looks as if he finds me so funny, that he allows. himself to submerge any pretence at professionalism in a sea of MI5-inspired. sarcasm and harassment. The two. BBC newscasters whose reactions to me I can remember most vividly over the years. are Martyn Lewis and Nicholas Witchell. I can remember thinking. years ago that Michael Buerk was also seeing me at home; and if the other two are watching then there. would be no reason why he wouldnt be doing the same; but in all honesty I cannot remember. a single clear instance of his. reacting through facial or verbal expression to me. I can remember several instances of Martyn Lewis. reacting to what he saw of me, however. In early 1992 I was watching the BBC news with Lewis. on a small black-and-white portable TV at my. then home in Oxford. I threw a term of abuse. at Lewis; he flinched, then gave a grin and made a comment from which I. understood that he had been on my side, but might have changed his mind as a. result of what Id just said to him. And in spring 1991 I remember Martyn Lewis clearly. reacting to what he saw of me at my then accommodation in. Woking, Surrey, by continuing to stare at some fixed point near the camera after. the news had finished - presumably this is where the monitor interactively showing pictures. of my room was. located. Why would BBC and other Newscasters Watch and Harass Me,. Watching Them? This is a very difficult question,. and I dont actually know the answer. It is a matter of record that the Secret Services are very. much part of the Establishment. The recent exposure of the "MI6 Agent List" on. the internet, and its coverage in the newspapers, reveals how much MI5. and MI6 are recruited from the. ranks of the Establishment. Obviously the relationship is bi-directional; the Establishment influences MI5/MI6,. but the secret services (well, perhaps not so secret now we know who works. for MI6!!!) also influence. the machinery of power and information dissemination i.e. media in this country. So they. must have a lot of covert leverage with the BBC. and ITN. Some of this leverage is obviously through bribery. It is. a matter of record that MI5 tried some years ago to "buy". Jon Snow of Channel Four TV. He turned them down - obviously they. must have approached other media people as well, and from the lack of other reports of people turning. them down, it may be presumed that some. other journalists will have accepted the sugared carrots. put before them. Ironically, Jon Snow has been taking part in the. recent "watching" actions against me - but why he has allowed himself to be used by the secret services is something which I do. not know. Perhaps the Security Service uses blackmail to twist. arms of journalists into co-operating with them? I have always thought there. was something slightly odd about Martyn. Lewiss demeanour. At the time of the Ron Davies "rough trade" scandal it was. reported that MI5 had known all about Davies predilections and the sham of. his pretence to be a happily married man. Perhaps MI5. have been able to dig something up from Martyn Lewiss private life to blackmail. him into acting on their behalf? And if there wasnt anything before the. "newscaster watching" started then there most certainly is. something now.... once theyve started watching, the newscasters will surely. wish their activities to remain covered-up, and co-operate with the security. service. "Newscaster Watching" Deliberately. Constructed to Mimic Schizophrenia Presumably this. is the first case in history of television journalists actually taking part in acts. of real-time, live spying and reacting against one of their viewers. What you have. to understand, though, is that I was quite mentally healthy in June 1990, certainly relative. to November 1992, when after two and a half. years of harassment I was finally admitted to hospital as an out-patient. MI5 decided. from the outset that they would make me mad;. they constructed the media harassment to resemble what would be. reported by a person with mental illness; and then they carried on years of abuse to inflict on. me the condition which they wished to use as an. excuse to cover up their abuses. I sold. my portable TV in autumn 1990 and stopped watching television regularly. I realise now that this may have. been a mistake. What I should have done was to watch TV. and listen to the radio, but tape-record everything and make a note. of what each excerpt meant to me. I would then be in. a much stronger position as regards to evidence that I am now. That is. what I am trying to do now, but unsurprisingly the TV/radio presenters have stopped getting at me,. now they know they are being recorded. When I started publicising my case on. internet newsgroups in 1995, I was met with the disbelief one might expect to. be accorded to a mentally ill person who talks about. "newscaster watching" and media persecution. Some newsgroup participants thought I had started a "troll",. an invention made to obtain a. reaction; one bright spark even suggested a group of psychology students were behind the articles.. But most people thought the articles were symptomatic of. derangement - and that is exactly what MI5 want people to think. MI5 chose me. as a target because I was mildly mentally ill at the outset in 1990, although I. stress my illness then was very mild in comparison with November. 1992, and because they knew that enough abuse would. (a) make me much more seriously ill, and (b) once I was more ill, they would "get away" with a harassment deliberately. constructed to. look like the symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia. Martyn Lewis Denies & Lies, But Wont in. Writing In February 1997 I wrote. to BBC Viewer & Listener Correspondence and asked them to investigate the claim that their newscasters had engaged. in "real-time spying" on me. They. replied that they had asked Martyn Lewis and Michael Buerk whether. they had engaged in such practices, and that they had both made verbal denials to VLC, but were refusing to put. their denials in. writing. To me it looks as if Lewis. and Buerk are happy to lie verbally but not in writing, because written falsehoods would place them unambiguously in. the wrong, whereas they can try. to talk their way out of verbal lies if they are ever caught, or perhaps even. deny the verbal lies completely? If they lie without shame, then why would they have any shame about. future lies about. lying? BBC-VLC also said that the BBC "would never engage. in any form of surveillance activity" such as that described. Clearly. Martyn Lewis and the. rest have lied to their own organisations personnel about their criminal actions. So much for the "objective", "truthful" BBC, a. nest of shabby. liars. Summons against the BBC, for Nuisance. caused by Newscaster Spying In March 1997. I issued a civil summons against the BBC, seeking injunction against further "newscaster spying",. and token damages for what the BBC had done to me until that date. The. purpose of the summons was to try to "smoke out". the BBC, since obviously I did not have good evidence which would be necessary for. either a civil or criminal case to be made against them. My summons was. worded as follows; 1.. The plaintiff is and was at all material times residing at [home address]. At. some time prior to or during June 1990, persons of unknown identity entered. Plaintiff's premises and installed concealed television equipment. in said premises. 2. A campaign of harassment was launched against the Plaintiff. by the persons of unknown identity, which. in part took the form of instigating harassment by BBC TV newscasters (including specifically Michael. Buerk and Martyn Lewis) as they read news bulletins,. by making direct and personal comments. to Plaintiff. 3. The. campaigns purpose was to subject Plaintiff to great mental stress and induce mental breakdown. As a result of it Plaintiff did. indeed suffer from severe mental strain. in 1990-97. 4. In order to avoid the mental strain. being caused to him the Plaintiff has been. compelled to stop watching BBC TV news. Defendant therefore committed the. tort of private nuisance, since normal use of home was interfered. with. 5. Plaintiff claims a permanent. injunction prohibiting further nuisance, and. damages for nuisance suffered limited to 5,000. Naturally, my attempt to smoke-out the BBC. and its lying newscasters failed. The BBCs litigation department sought to have my summons. struck out; and they succeeded in. doing so, on the grounds of my action "disclosing no reasonable cause of action". I was also prevented. from issuing further civil claims against. the BBC without leave of the Court. Apparently litigants-in-person frequently /. usually have their claims struck out with this wording,. regardless of the merit of their claims. BBC Suppresses my Claims of "Watching. by Newscasters" BBCs staff magazine Ariel ran my advert "BBC. Newsreaders Spying on my home" for one issue in the Personal category on 8/July/1997 before it. was spotted. and axed by editor Robin Reynolds; please see webpage;. http://www.pair.com/spook/evidence/plaint/ariel.htm Clearly the BBC will not. allow claims of its wrongdoing to be made public in. the media channels it controls. On. several occasions people said to my face that harassment from the TV was happening. On the first day. I worked in Oxford, I spent the evening in the local pub the Rose. and Crown with the company's technical director Ian,. and Phil, another employee. Ian made a few references to me and said to. Phil, as if in an aside, "Is he the bloke who's been on TV?" to which Phil. replied, "Yes, I think so". The reader might. think that mere "watching" by newscasters etc might be a relatively benign happening. But. it is not; it is part of MI5s framework of harassment and lies.. On many occasions the reactions of the BBCs newscasters to me has been in. the nature of sarcasm, implicit contempt and abuse. This is visible in Witchells news programme mentioned. above, where he engages in abuse by laughing at me. during his newsreading. It was particularly. visible in the early period of 1990-92, and as late as Autumn 1993, when during. a Newsnight broadcast Jeremy Paxman interviewed a football. person about soccer hooliganism, and the interviewee gave vent to an unsubtle rant. about "theyre idiots, theyre just idiots, keep up the surveillance". Paxman started grinning, showing. he understood and was taking part. in the abuse being perpetrated on that programme. Conclusion The MI5 Persecution started with harassment. by television newscasters, and today harassment by TV and radio presenters still forms. a key part of MI5s activities against me. When this. business started in June 1990 I was in relatively good health of mind. Years of persecution. by the secret police and their mouthpieces in the state-run BBC and other. media eroded my health until MI5 achieved their aim of seeing. me rendered mentally ill in November 1992. The diagnosis which was forced on me. unfortunately and ironically meant that. my reports of the harassment are disregarded, because the mentally ill are. second-class citizens in todays Britain. Yet TV and radio harassment continues, albeit in a reduced form,. despite my taping. all the programmes I watch, resulting in my being able to obtain and demonstrate objectively. on the website instances of media presenters attacking me. Unfortunately these. recorded instances are quite tenuous; I might understand them, the presenters understand what it is theyre. doing, but despite many thousands of people knowing the truth of the. "newscaster watching", the omerta continues and they continue to refuse to. admit the truth of the matter. It is a terrible indictment of British. society that there is not even one decent person willing to. speak out. I look forward to. the day when the truth does finally emerge, and the mass corruption which has allowed the MI5 persecution to take place is. finally purged and the Establishment criminals. caught and appropriately punished. 5407 Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176297
 - 7
 - M-I'5-Persecu tion . Four Years of MI 5 Persec ution P osts on Inter net Newsgr oups Four Years of. "MI5 Persecution" Posts on Internet Newsgroups For approximately the first three years of. the MI5 persecution, from June 1990 until late 1992, I kept as quiet as possible, in. the hope that by not reacting, MI5s interest in me would. decrease and they would simply go away of their own accord. This is the. sort of behaviour some people employ against. bullies; if the bullies arent getting a reaction, then they might simply go away. and victimize someone else. Unfortunately, this. tactic didnt work. The quieter I became, the more shrill and hysterical the noise from the Security Service. operatives. For about two years I didnt watch TV news at all. Yet. this only heightened their obsessed fixation; they. continued to follow me wherever I went, they continued to induce harassment at work by. managers and fellow workers, and they continued to. encourage me to commit suicide. They seemed to regard my refusal to react as a crime which they would have to "put right" by. ever more. extreme forms of abuse. Finally, in. 1995, I changed tactics radically. Since late 1994 I had had accounts with internet providers in Ontario,. Canada. I discovered the cornucopia of internet newsgroups,. on every topic from consumer electronics, to. politics and legal topics, and I discovered online services such as Compuserve and AOL.. In May 1995, I made the first posting to. the conspiracy newsgroup, on the subject of "BBCs Hidden Shame". BBC's Hidden. Shame The. internet newsgroup discussion, which has now reached its fourth anniversary, started with. an article in alt.conspiracy, which I reproduce here. Date: Thu May. 4 18:27:24 1995 Newsgroups:. alt.conspiracy Subject: BBC's Hidden. Shame Remember the. two-way televisions in George Orwell's 1984? The ones which watched you back? Which you could never get rid. of, only the sound could be turned down? Well the country which brought Orwell. into the world has made his nightmare follow into the world after him. Since 1990 the British. have been waging war against one of their own citizens using surveillance. to invade privacy and a campaign of abuse in the transmitted media in. their efforts to humiliate their "victim". And the most remarkable thing about it is that what they do. is not even illegal - the UK has no laws. to protect the privacy of its citizens, nor does it proscribe harassment or abuse. except in the case of racial abuse. A lot of people in England know this to be going on,. yet so far they have maintained perfect "omerta"; not a sound, not a squeak has escaped into. the English press, and for all. the covert harassment absolutely nothing has come out into the public domain. Have the. British gone mad? I think we should be told At this point, I did not name MI5 as my persecutors. I was. still unsure that they. were the ones responsible for the "psychological terrorism". In followup posts however I did name them; and the persecutors have. never denied the. claim; so I think my guess is valid. (The Security Service Tribunal in 1997. have said "no determination in your favour was made", but it is a well established fact that MI5. lies routinely to the Tribunal which has never found in favour of a plaintiff, so. no conclusions can be drawn from. this.) This first post was made to alt.conspiracy, but further posts were. made to the UK-local newsgroups, in particular uk.misc but. also uk.legal and uk.politics (which is now called. uk.politics.misc). Some time ago I tried to take the battle. to the Compuserve forums, UKPOLITICS (which is now called UKCURRENT - current affairs), but my articles were censored. by the forum. operators. Such censorship is impossible on the internet newsgroups. Police Refuse to. Act I. have complained several times to the Metropolitan Police, who have each time. refused to help. From: Green. <Green@guidion.demon.co.uk> Newsgroups:. uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: Why Aren't the British Police Doing. Their Job? Reply-To:. Green@guidion.demon.co.uk Date: Sun Apr 7 21:13:30. 1996 In. article <DpIE0r.736.0.bloor@torfree.net> . bu765@torfree.net "Mike Corley" writes: >Last Easter (1995) I went into the. local police station in London and spoke to >an officer about the. harassment against me. But I couldn't provide tangible >evidence; what people said, in many cases years ago,. is beyond proof, and >without something to support my statements. I cannot expect a police officer to >take the complaint. seriously. This in itself dos not suggest that the. police have it in for you. The old bill operates. on extremely tight spending limits forced on them by that pillock Michael Howard, and without evidence, they. often have higher priorities than chasing something that cannot go. to court. I doubt that the police are actually being leant on,. but they probably realise that if they looked into this, they. would be leant on hard. The met always stays away from anything that looks like it has Defence, Security or secret. service interest already, because they realise that they are below these government agencies in. the general pecking. order. If I walked into my local nick and complained that MI5 were snooping. on me, they would show me the door without even looking at. my evidence, because that bored desk seargant with only five years to go before he retires doesn't want. to start fucking about with somebody who has incurred the wrath of Stella Rimington. He. would rather deal with the lost dogs and driving licence producers,. eat his cheese and pickle sandwiches and piss off home at the end of his shift. than have some high ranking spook having a go at his boss and getting. him a bollocking. In short, you have earned much sympathy but little surprise. Just remember that. saying about. the enemy of your enemies. Most recently, I wrote. in March 1999 to Charing Cross Police Station CID. They did not acknowledge. or reply to my letter. When I phoned them up, the detective Id written to treated. me to a sadly not unusual display of police bigotry, with an. uneducated rant about "your paranoid rubbish". It would be. nice to think that such uneducated bigotry is something other than wholly typical of police behaviour, but unfortunately that. is an illusion that is rapidly. dispelled. Uncorruptible. Jon Snow of Channel Four News From previous articles the reader will know what I think. Jon Snow has recently been watching me while he reads. Channel Four News in the evening. Recently I digitized a few moments. of one such broadcast, where his. face twists into a smile, without there being anything in the news broadcast to cause merriment. Here is. a usenet post from some time ago on MI5s "bought and paid for" tools in the so-called. "free" press. Peter Harding. (harding@ermine.ox.ac.uk) wrote: : I was. at speakers' corner on Sunday. There was one chap who was bellowing : about something or other, I don't know what, but. one thing he said to : someone caught. my ear: : "BBC, MI5, same. thing." Can't. disagree with that sentiment. Wasn't it. documented that MI5 sometimes "bought" journalists and broadcasters? I remember reading. a report by some jouralist who had been offered an extra tax-free income by MI5 to become. their covert mouthpiece, and had refused. ............................................................................. > : >mouthpiece,. and had refused. >. : > : It. was Jon Snow of Channel 4. > > Was it reported. in any of the papers? It has been reported several. times. The most recent was in Private Eye, a few months back. As I recall they also wanted. information from him; journalists would be. a natural choice for members of the Security Service and. the Secret Intelligence Service for information sources. > It might be. interesting to see what he had to say regarding their > attempt. to recruit him. He was most concerned that many others would have. accepted such an offer. However, we can probably make an educated. guess as to some of those who accepted:. Nigel West (Rupert Allason, MP) and Chapman Pincher would come. near to the top of the list. -- \/ David. Boothroyd. Socialist and election analyst. Omne ignotum pro magnifico. British Elections and Politics. at http://www.qmw.ac.uk/~laws/election/home.html I. wish I was in North Dakota. Next General Election must be before 22nd May '97 The House of Commons now : C 324, Lab 272, L Dem 25, UU. 9, PC 4, SDLP 4, SNP 4, UDUP 3, Ind 1, Ind UU 1, Spkrs 4. Government majority = 1.. Telephone Tate 6125. Corrupt. Security Service agents steal millions from taxpayers Money is of course a factor in the. grand equation which is the MI5 persecution.. It costs money for the Security Service to "buy" people in the media etc. But that is only a small. part of their expenditure of taxpayers resources. Most of the expenditure is directly. on the salaries if the agents involved; and. in this post I put forward the theory that MI5 are trying to draw out their involvement for as long. as possible, very cynically, to maximise their income and. line their own pockets. At each stage they have tried to. pretend that I am something out of the ordinary. Either I was very stupid ("he's an idiot") or very clever ("he's like. a genius"). Either I was. a threat to Western civilization (Levin once referred to me as the next Hitler) or I was completely defenceless ("a. soft toy"). Now, it should be obvious to any person with common-sense that I am not out of. the ordinary in any way. I have an IQ which is average for the Web, I. am racially white European, and there are plenty of other people with schizophrenia. or epilepsy out there who haven't. been targeted for MI5 attention, so why me? I think the answer is that the MI5 agents who. harass me have cynically exploited the situation by painting me as extraordinary in order to. assure themselves of well-paid employment funded by the ordinary British. taxpayer. To put it bluntly, they are stealing millions of pounds from the taxpayer to feed their own. pockets. This assertion is supported by the observation that it's the. same agents who are doing the harassment. Six months ago in a local hospital I was. harassed by someone whose face I had seen (he had stared straight at me aggressively, at the time I. just thought it was some nutter but it turns out he was one of "them") aboard. a KLM flight a couple of years ago. It's presumably been the same people most of. the time. I've seen the way contractors act when they don't want their. positions terminated. Would these agents really want to. lose their well-paid employment harassing me? Presumably they are promising their bosses a "breakthrough" (ie my demise) real-soon-now and have. been for the last seven years, while all the while. these MI5 agents skim millions off. the taxpayer. I wouldn't mind a job like that. Perhaps if I persecute myself a. little bit, like standing in front of a mirror and. shouting mindless obscenities, do you reckon I'd get a slice of the caky Service Tribunal. This. year Nick Brooks, current Tribunal Secretary, confirmed to me. that he could not think of a single case where the Tribunal. had found in favour of a complainant. Here is my usenet post. from two years ago. Subject: MI5: "It wasn't. us" Newsgroups:. uk.misc,uk.legal Organization: Toronto. Free-Net "The. Security Service Tribunal have now investigated your complaint and have asked me to inform you that no determination in your favour has been made. on your. complaint." Signed ER. Wilson, Tribunal Secretary Well that's a relief then. All that spamming. for nothing eh. Gaw blimey, if they say they're not doing it then it. can't be them, can it? In. a recent letter to Mr Brooks I expressed the opinion that the Tribunal were unable to fulfil their responsibilities in the face of. MI5 falsehoods. Nevertheless, I. do intend to make another complaint to the Tribunal in the near future, despite the. Tribunal appearing to be a toothless. watchdog. Discrimination against. a Unit Minority MI5 have been. very clear in their instructions as to what I should do. They. have openly shouted at me the word "suicide", and also from the other abuse it is clear that they want my. existence terminated. This point is covered in more. detail in a previous article. The following post describes the xenophobic nature of MI5s campaign against. me. They have refined their bigotry down. to a unit minority, yet they make use of the discrimination against the mentally ill which is a feature. of current British. society. Subject: Re: MI5 says. "Kill Yourself" Newsgroups:. uk.misc,uk.legal,uk.politics.misc,uk.media References:. <zlsiida.4248.3258FE24@fs1.mcc.ac.uk> <53eeev$cmg@axalotl.demon.co.uk> Organization: Toronto. Free-Net Distribution: iain@hotch.demon.co.uk (Iain. L M Hotchkies) wrote: >Indeed. If. you've ever had a 'conversation' with someone suffering >from florid schizophrenia,. you'll know how difficult it can be to >'argue' with. them. I don't have. florid symptoms. But I'm in a difficult situation, because those people who. don't know, aren't going to believe, and those who do, they just go along with the crowd. It's. never a good idea to go against the grain, and the grain here is defined by interests in the establishment and. the media. Even people who could say out loud what was happening won't, because then. there's a risk that they'll be. seen as traitors and ostracised. Usually this type of 'hidden abuse' is racial and. targetted at a racial minority within a country. You keep the minorities. out of the good jobs, but you don't admit discrimination exists. It happens everywhere, not. just in Britain. The persecution that is going on now is in reality a. refined form of racism. Instead of "nigger" it's "nutter", and abusing. the mentally ill is still socially. acceptable today. In 50 years it might not be, but today there isn't any social or legal sanction. against it. So really they've refined racial harassment down to a minority of one.. The words may be different, but the methods. are the same. 3937 Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176296
 - 8
 - M`I 5.Pe rsecution ` M I5 Wast e Ta xpayer Million s on Pointless Hate-C ampaign MI5 Persecution Update: Friday 30 April,. 1999 If You. Intend To Reply, Please Read This Please.... keep your response to one page!. Faxes. over a page or two will be. deleted without being read. Somewhere between. 0 and 100% The last few days there have been. no clear recordable instances of abuse. However, while travelling. on the Underground, while walking around near my home and going to friends homes, I. am constantly troubled by thoughts that. those people over there might be about to get at me; that the couple sitting in the opposite seats. laughing are in fact laughing at me; et cetera, et. cetera. A. comment by a scientist to the BSE inquiry sticks in my mind. He described the. possible scale of the epidemic as "between 0% and 100%". It might not be. happening, it might not happen at all, to any discernable degree.... or. it might be total. Without clear recording, which seems to have become impossible the last. couple of weeks, there is no way of knowing whether the harassment really is continuing,. whether we have entered a temporary hiatus,. or whether perhaps it has perhaps stopped for now. But for the time being I think there arent any reasons to dicontinue. these faxes. I only re-started them six weeks ago in. response to a resumption of MI5 harassment; and I think I will need to be more convinced. of absence of persecution before I discontinue. my complaints. The Newscasters are still. watching In the last few weeks there have. been at least a couple of fairly overt instances of. "interactive watching" by newscasters. I reported this in a previous "MI5. Persecution Update". These. instances are really very rare compared to 1990-91, when there were many dozens of such occurrences. Undoubtedly the reduction is. due to my practice of videotaping everything I see. Recently I had the. opportunity of showing this. years "happenings" (Jon Snow/Nicholas Witchell) to my psychiatrist, and he agreed. that in both cases the newscasters were expressing. merriment without visible cause, and that objectively it might be possible for my claims to be true -. although of course other people reported similar thoughts to him, and this thinking. is usually a symptom of. illness. Read About the MI5 Persecution on the. World Wide Web The March. 1998 issue (number 42) of .net Magazine reviews the website describing it as an "excellent site". Since. August 11, 1996 over 50,000 people have browsed this. website. You are encouraged to read the. web pages which include a FAQ (frequently asked questions) section. outlining the nature of the persecutors, their methods of harassment through the media, people. at work and among the general. public an evidence section, which carries. audio and video clips of media and workplace harassment, rated according to how directly I think they. refer to me objective descriptions of. the state security agencies involved scanned texts of the. complaints I have made to media and state security agencies. involved posts which have been made to netnews over the last. four years on this topic Keith Hill MP (Labour - Streatham), my. elected representative, as ever refuses to. help. MI5. Waste Taxpayer Millions on Pointless Hate-Campaign Recently I was talking to. an independent observer about the nature and purpose of the perceived campaign of persecution against. me. The person I spoke to, a highly intelligent man, said he. was struck by the utter pointlessness. of the perceived campaign against me. He also said that, if my theories were. in fact true, many people would have to be involved, in the surveillance itself, and in the technical side of. the delivery of information. from my home to TV studios for example, if the "interactive watching" were happening as. described. He voiced these thoughts without any prompting from me; but both I and other observers. had arrived at pretty much. the same conclusions, some years ago. I saw a team of four men at Toronto. Airport in 1993 To carry out the surveillance alone, full-time, would. employ four or five men, or. their equivalent in terms of man-hours. Each man would "work" an eight-hour shift, so you would need at least. three men doing the surveillance, plus. a connecting link / manager. An indicator that this estimate is correct arrived in 1993, when I was accosted by. one of a group of four men at Toronto Airport; he said, laughing,. "if he tries to run away well find him". Plainly these. were the men who had been involved in the intrusive surveillance of. me for the preceding three years. On other occasions, I have seen the. same man on two or three occasions. On one such occasion, at Ottawas Civic Hospital in November 1996;. he gave his name to the doctor as "Alan Holdsworth" or some such;. my hearing is not very good sometimes and I am not sure of the. surname, although I am sure "Alan" was his first name. I saw exactly the same man again in. Ottawa, at the airport, in July 1998. Obviously, other people must. be "working" with this person; he would not be the sole agent employed in. this case. Usenet readers views on the Cost to. MI5 of Running the Campaign Here's what a couple of other people. on internet newsgroups / Usenet (uk.misc) had to say. regarding the cost of running such an operation... PO: >Have some sense, grow up and. smell reality. What you are talking about PO: >would take loads of. planning, tens of thousands of pounds and lots of PO: >people. involved in the planning, execution and maintenance of it. You PO: >must have a very high opinion of yourself to think you are worth. it. and...... PM: >But why?. And why you? Do you realize how much it would cost to keep PM: >one person under continuous surveillance. for five years? Think about PM: >all the man/hours.. Say they _just_ allocated a two man team and a PM: >supervisor. OK., Supervisor's salary, say,. #30,000 a year. Two men, PM: >#20,000 a year each. But. they'd need to work in shifts -- so it would PM: >be six men at #20,000 (which with on-costs would work. out at more like PM:. >#30,000 to the employer.) PM:. > PM: >So, we're. talking #30,000 x 6. #180,000. plus say, #40,000 for the PM: >supervisor. #220,000.. Then you've got the hardware involved. And PM: >any transcription that needs doing. You don't think the. 'Big Boss' PM: >would listen to hours and. hours of tapes, do you. PM:. > PM: >So, all in all, you couldn't actually do the job for. much less than PM: >a quarter million a year. Over. five years. What are you doing that makes PM:. >it worth the while of the state to spend over one and a quarter million PM:. >on you? Those are pretty much. the sort of calculations that went through my head once I stopped to. consider what it must be costing them to run this operation. At the very least, a quarter million a year - and. probably much more, given the intrusive and. human-resource-intensive methods employed. Times nine years. Equals well over two million pounds -. and probably. much, much more. Its wasteful for someone with my skills. to be unemployed The wastefulness of the MI5 campaign against me is not just. that of futile expenditure on their side.. It is also extremely wasteful for someone with my talents to be unemployed and on a disability. pension. I am highly qualified in numerate disciplines,. yet am unable to work, specifically because of the MI5 hate-campaign against me. It is a terrible. waste of resources for a supposedly efficient economy like that of the UK to. be squandering. the talents of a skilled and capable worker. I made every effort to remain in employment for as. long as I could, but ultimately I was. defeated by MI5s employment of massive resources specifically targeted on my workplaces with the sole aim. of seeing me evicted from those. workplaces. You might expect this sort of behaviour from the. Stasi or some other secret police force in a communist country where labour is cheap,. and the governments aim on seeing its citizens confined; but for a supposedly free and efficient. economy like Britains, the wastefulness resulting both directly and. indirectly from the Security Services activities is simply. criminal, and should never be allowed. The international dimension means the costs are. multiplied many times overoer had any sense, then they. have surely taken leave of them over the last. nine years. Four years of. persecution in Canada The persecution re-started within less than five minutes. of my arrival in Canada, as documented above,. and in the "frequently asked questions" article on the website.. The words, "if he tries to run away well find him" spoken by one of the harassers at Toronto. Airport are now imprinted on. my mind. A year later I emigrated. to Canada, intending to find a job and settle there, hoping that MI5s interest in. me might dim with time. I did manage to find. work there, but my hopes of avoiding Security Service interest were ground into dust.. As detailed above, I saw the same man in November 1996 and July 1998, both times. in Ottawa. Apart from these encounters, there were numerous incidents between 1994 and 1998. of harassment, of an identical nature and. in most cases using identical words to what had occurred in the. UK. It became quite clear to me that the permanent surveillance and. harassment operation which MI5 had subjected me to in England. was being continued. For a team of four or. five men to be employed overseas must cost a lot more than if they operate in their home country. And for MI5 to. continue the operation for a period of. over four years, continuously, must cost many hundreds of thousands of pounds. This confirms my belief. that the state is funding the campaign against mehat the Security Service. receives current annual funding of #160M. Divided by 1850 staff, works. out at #86,000. But the unit annual cost of each. "watcher" must be much higher than this, especially given the frequently mobile. and overseas nature of their actions of the last few years. A very conservative figure. might be a little over #100,000 pa for each of a team. of five people, or half a million pounds per year. For nine years, so. far. So the most conservative estimate of the surveillance element alone is. perhaps four or five million pounds since. 1990. This guesstimate is of course theoretical - I am not privy. to inside details of how MI5 split their funding. But to take some other. examples, the cost of. a US counter-surveillance specialist per day is USD 5,000. Even. if the agents permanently assigned to me are not of this calibre - even. if they employ specialists when difficult work planting bugs etc is encountered - their salary and support costs must still. be very high. The individual agents. are doing well for themselves as they are well-paid to exercise psychopathic instincts which in any sane. society would see them in prison; but the taxpayers who must fund. this terribly wasteful exercise are being "done". out of hundreds of thousands of pounds each. year. It must be. emphasised that the above estimates are highly conservative. Besides the surveillance operation, it must. carry a high cost in man-hours to propagate covert. slanders through the population; to setup and maintain the "interactive watching" links. to TV and radio stations, which. these organisations continue desparately to "lie and deny";. and to induce antipathy in co-workers which would not otherwise exist. Why they are wasting. Millions of Pounds on a "Nobody from South London" As remarked in the prologue to this article, it is really. most extraordinary that the Security. Service spends a chunk of its budget, every year for nine years so far, on a meaningless campaign. against a "nobody from South London". That they are spending. such a large amount of money has been confirmed to. me on several occasions, usually by oblique references to. "its costing this country millions". The supposed "logic" behind the persecution is that MI5 wish to avoid their. harassment of me, and the involvement of the UK. media, to be made public; yet as the reader will appreciate that is a circular argument, "theyre. doing it because they want to keep it secret and avoid. humiliation for themselves and their country" begs the question, "why did they start doing it in. the first place?", to which in truth I myself do not know the. answer. Plainly MI5 with its rich budget can. afford half a million pounds a year to waste on. a "nobody from South London". Some time ago I was talking to a British. surveillance professional on Compuserve who told me "this work costs a. lot of money and is usally because the person I am following has done. something (usually criminal) to warrant all this money and time being spent." Yet in this particular case it is plainly not. the "victims fault". that the harassment is taking place. The hate-campaign against me is completely the creation of the obsessive psychologies of the. MI5 agents who have made themselves my persecutors;. it is obviously a "personal" campaign for them, and for. years they misuse taxpayer funding to feed their insane, unnatural and. fixated fantasies. 2467 Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176295
 - 9
 - M,I.5'Persecut ion Com paring the MI 5 Persecu tion wit h Ge rman F inal So lution MI5 Persecution Update:. Friday 16 April, 1999 If You Intend. To Reply, Please Read This Please.... keep your. response to one page!. Faxes over a page or two will be deleted. without being read. BBC newscaster Nicholas Witchell cant stop himself. laughing During 1990-91 there were. very many instances of "interactive television" where newscasters and other TV presenters saw on. a screen before them what was happening in my. home, and reacted, frequently by laughing at me.. During this period I unfortunately did not record these programmes. For the last year or two, I have been recording everything. I watch, and there has been a drastic. decrease in such incidents. However, on occasion, television presenters do. still engage in "interactive watching" and react to what they. see. This has been evident with Jon Snow of Channel Four News. recently - a particularly interesting case, since it has been. established that he cannot be corrupted by money (it is well-documented that. MI5 offered him a tax-free salary and he turned them down). I wonder what device MI5 are using to. encourage him to do the "interactive. watching"? On. Saturday 10 April 1999 at 7pm, Nicholas Witchell on BBC2 News reacted when he saw that I was. watching the programme, and I have his reactions stored safely on videotape. I have watched. this tape several times and I am entirely confident that. my evaluation of his reactions is correct. For several minutes his upper lip quivered in mirth as he attempted to. keep a straight face. Then finally his self-control evaporated through the. excuse of a weak joke and his face. collapsed into a grin. The strange thing is that I dont know why he was laughing at me,. what I had done recently to "deserve" to. be laughed at. The MI5 persecutors usually manage to invent some justification as to why people should. laugh at and/or abuse me ("hes. an X", "it was so funny" etc), so Mr Witchell could have been laughing for any number of reasons. Perhaps he found. the views. I have been expressing in these articles amusing? I suppose if youre paid enough money and ordered to. laugh then even the most innocuous thing becomes. funny. Jon Snow of Channel Four News cant stop. himself smirking, either. On 12 February 1999 I was watching Channel Four. News presented by Jon Snow. As usual, I was recording the programme, so that if. anything out of the ordinary happened,. Id be able to go back and watch it again. Now, Jon Snow, by his own claim, is. uncorruptible. He says he turned down an offer. of a substantial tax-free salary from MI5 - they wanted to make him their mouthpiece, and he told them where to get. off. So you will be most surprised to learn. that Jon Snow "interactively watched" me that evening, and. on many other evenings. Approximately fifteen minutes into the programme, he announced that the. US President would be making a live appearance at about 7.30pm; I looked at. the clock on the mantelpiece;. and Snow saw me looking at the clock, and visibly tried to suppress a. smirk. Uncorruptible, are you, Mister Snow? If not money,. then why are you watching me, Mister Snow? Are they. forcing you to watch me? Cant you turn the monitor off,. Mister Snow? Keith Hill MP (Labour - Streatham), my elected representative, as. ever refuses. to help. Comparing the MI5 Persecution. with German "Final Solution" It might seem offensive to. compare the mass murder of millions of civilians in wartime with the peacetime persecution of merely. one person. Yet the comparison has been coursing. through my mind for several years now, because. the brutality of German intent to "sub-humans" is very much comparable to the brutality. of British intent to someone they vituperate and term "not up to British standards". The. methods may differ, but. the persecutors mindset is the same. The Germans. first targeted the mentally disabled, too During WW2 millions of ethnic Russians, Poles, Jews, mentally. ill, gypsies and other minorities were rounded up. and murdered in purpose-built camps by the German regime, in the name of "racial. superiority". Fifty years on, the. British Secret Police, MI5, instituted a campaign of mass hysteria; but in their cowardice,. limited their activities to one single victim. It. is instructive to note that the early German "cleansing" effort was directed primarily not at. Jews, but at the mentally ill. The Nazis set up the T4 project in the thirties to. "cleanse" away 70,000 mentally disabled people, including schizophrenics and epileptics. After WW2 the. Jews with their media. influence used the reaction from the holocaust to roll back anti-semitism in the. Western countries; however, the mentally ill are today still. a persecuted group in the modern Western world as they were under the Nazis (the current Jewish home secretary in the UK. intends to bring in laws for incarceration without any criminal charge for. some mentally ill people - he. protects his own minority, but does nothing for the other minorities in todays society), and this continuing bias. forms a central cause for. the current acts of persecution in the UK. Widespread knowledge. of what is happening to the "un-British" minority In both the German persecution of the thirties and. early forties, and the current British persecution, many, many people. are well aware of whats happening. There is widespread complicity. through inaction of populace; and in. a substantial proportion of the mainstread population, the persecution. had/has widespread enthusiastic support; yet in both the German case. in the 1940s and the British today, the existence of persecution. is a mass secret which must be never admitted out loud. In the recent Lawrence case this. "secret bigotry" has been termed "institutionalised racism", and that is a very good word for what. the British are. doing today The persecutory attitudes and omerta regarding them are so deeply ingrained in the. national psyche that they define the national. mood During WW2 many Germans knew minorities. were disappearing, and through inaction quietly condoned their government's mass murder. of "un-German" minorities and. inferior "foreigners"; and in the 1990s, similarly, many. English people know what the MI5 British Secret Police have been doing, and not only condone it, but. actively take part, because of xenophobia against the "un-British" unit minority. that is the target of "British" actions. This attitude by the British. persecutors has been made explicit through the words "he's not up to British standards"; the. British seem to have found their. very own "untermenschen" to victimise. Why these obsessive "holy wars". happen This type of aggression occurs when the majority is. threatened or humiliated in some way,. economically, militarily or culturally. In pre-WW2 Germany. the threat was primarily economic and military, following Germany's. humiliating defeat in the first world war and the reparations it was forced to. pay. In modern Britain, one might guess that the majority English who are behind the persecution feel pressured by the. swiftly diminishing status of. Britain in the world, and the rapidly increasing coloured. colonisation of their country, which in time will see the ethnic English a minority in their own land, and. their more antisocial elements, unable to reply to the obvious threat, instead project their. aggression onto. another, weaker, unit minority In both cases there is a whiff. of "holy war" or irrational obsession with the persecution. Certainly the German behaviour fifty years. ago bordered on the not-quite-sane, and the current British behaviour. towards their chosen victim is strongly tinged with a leave-taking. of reason. And the choices open. to the victims are the same, since MI5 will never allow me to escape them, "if he tries to run. away we'll find him", just like the commandant of. Auschwitz telling the new arrivals, "the only escape is through. the chimney". The Victim. Will Destroy Us if We Dont Destroy Him First The persecutors propaganda is the same.. Fifty years ago the Germans said, "if we don't do it to. the Jews then the Jews will do it to us"; and MI5's propaganda in the early nineties concentrated on their victim. as a "monster". aesome "untermenschen" minority. "We. are decent fellows" say the Brutal Persecutors During the course of researching this article I read part of the. very interesting book, "Hitler - A Study. in Tyranny", by Alan Bullock. This volume contains a quote from Himmler. on the "Final Solution"; "Most of you know what it means when a. hundred corpses are lying side by side, or five hundred or one thousand. To have stuck it out, and at. the same time .... to have remained decent fellows, that. is what has made us hard. This is a page of glory in our history. which has never been written and. is never to be written." In the MI5 persecution, too, there is a. thread of deliberate brutality to the sick and vulnerable, while the persecutors maintain that. "we are decent fellows". There is almost. a conscious schizophrenia in the self-attitudes of the Security Service operatives and those in. the public who they. employ against me, which reflects the contradiction evident in the German attitude above. On. the one hand, they stoop to the lowest and most base behaviour; yet at. the same time, the MI5 operatives tell themselves that since they are civilised British people, then. surely they must by definition be "decent fellows". Any indecency. is made the fault of the victim; "hes making us persecute him, so we. need feel no guilt". Yet the. conduct is atypical of the way these peoples see their normal modes of. behaviour. Befslaughter was not typical of normal German behaviour up to that. point. Similarly, the current MI5 abuse goes against the grain of British self-image as being. "reserved" and "decent", since they are using terms of abuse. which are common among blacks and other supposedly less-developed. races, but not among the English. Conclusion The ultimate aim of both persecutions is the. humiliation and physical extinction of the persecuted group.. The Germans did this in a very direct way; the British. Secret Police MI5 are acting indirectly and relying on self-extinction of their target, because in peacetime. and in the current somewhat false climate of "political. correctness" more direct methods are impossible. If MI5 undertook more direct action the. mass "omerta" would be broken. I have. written this article with sincerity to show how a historically recent persecution. in another country parallels what is being done in this country today. In both cases, the evil-doers are. of their countries establishments, and rely on widespread tacit. support to maintain the persecution and omerta around it. While the holocaust. was undoubtedly the greater evil, it is important to be. aware of the fact that had the Germans not been defeated fifty years ago, their plans would have gone through. to total. completion. In Britain today no force threatens the "permanent government" of. which the Security Service forms a part; and it looks very unlikely that the wrongs perpetrated by the MI5 secret police will. ever be revealed to public view, and the. British secret state brought to justice for its evil. actions. 997 Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176294
 - 10
 - =?iso-8859-1?Q?AD:::_desastre_e_recupera=E7=E3o?= Caros amigos, Na semana passada, a CPU do meu servidor de AD parou de funcionar, e a CPU-backup para minha infelicidade está alocada em outro cliente. Tentei colocar o HD-SCSI em outra CPU qualquer porém é exibido a famosa "tela azul". Para aliviar os problemas de rede (DNSs e Exchange), devido a ausência do meu AD (DNS primário), executei as seguintes ações: 1) adicionei o IP do AD-server, como IP secundário no DC-1 (com DNS secundário) 2) Promovi a zona secundária do DC-1 para zona primária, uma vez que as zonas começaram a expirar, e os demais DCs (DC-2, DC-3, DC-4) foram apontados para o DC-1. 3) Transferi as funções de PDC e Infrastructure para o DC-1. Erro: Não consegui transferir o RID, porque o servidor não estava on-line. As pergunta são: 1) Qual é o melhor procedimento para restaurar o AD nesta situação ? 2) Consigo montar um novo AD, e fazer com que no novo AD leia as informações dos outros DCs, independente de um backup, ou utilizando as informações do HD que está parado? PS: Tenho o HD-SCSI, e não consigo iniciá-lo com Windows em outro hardware, e o Backup também não funciona para outro hardware. Desde já agradeço pela colaboração, e desejo Boas Festas !!!!! Abraços, SANDRO FELIZ Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176284
 - 11
 - Yardým Edin Lütfen! DNS - NetDiag - Active Directory Users and Computers - HELP ME!! TURKEY!! Arkadaþlar, Serverda bulunan eternet kartý arýzalandýgý icin yeni eternet kartý taktým, fakat "Active Directory" çalýþmýyor. \\192.10.10.1 þeklinde makineyede eriþemiyorum. Active Directory Users and Computers çalýþtýrdýgýmda Naming information cannot be located becaude: The specified domain either does not exist or could not be contacted. Contact your system administrator to verify that your domain is properly configured and is currently online. ok diyip, ilerleyince Active Directory Users and Computers kýrmýzý çarpý geliyor. üzerinde sað klýk yapýp Connect to Domain... dedigimde domaine baglanamýyorum Connect to Domain Controller... dedigim zaman domain adýný yazýnda yes dedigimde kullanýcýlar geliyor fakat Active Directory Users and Computers kapatýp açýnca yine kýrmýzý çarpýlý açýlýyor. Etkinleþtiremiyorum! :( ne olur birisi yardým etsin! cmd penceresinde nslookup dedigim zaman *** Can't find server name for address 192.10.10.1: Non-existent domain *** Default servers are not available Default Server: UnKnown Address: 192.10.10.1 dns server start oldugu halde. serverýn ip adresi ile dns adreside ayný! HELP ME!!! Kerem KUÞ +90 532 204 75 50 NetDiag Logu Aþagýda belirttigim gibidir. Computer Name: DC DNS Host Name: dc.denco System info : Windows 2000 Server (Build 2195) Processor : x86 Family 6 Model 11 Stepping 4, GenuineIntel List of installed hotfixes : KB329115 KB822343 KB823182 KB823559 KB824105 KB825119 KB826232 KB828035 KB828749 KB832353 KB832359 KB833407 KB841356 KB842773 KB885836 KB890046 KB893756 KB893803v2 KB896358 KB896422 KB896423 KB896424 KB899587 KB899589 KB899591 KB900725 KB901017 KB901214 KB904706 KB905414 KB905495-IE6SP1-20050805.184113 KB905749 KB908519 KB908523 KB908531 KB911280 KB911564 KB911567-OE55SP2-20060317.162653 KB912812-IE501SP4-20060322.172831 KB912919 KB913580 KB914388 KB914389 KB916281-IE501SP4-20060519.173353 KB917008 KB917159 KB917344 KB917422 KB917537 KB917736 KB917953 KB918118 KB918899-IE501SP4-20060725.072042 KB920213 KB920670 KB920683 KB920685 KB920958 KB921398 KB921503 KB921883 KB922582 KB922616 KB923191 KB923414 KB923694-OE55SP2-20061106.120000 KB923694-OE6SP1-20061106.120000 KB923810 KB923980 KB924191 KB924270 KB924667 KB925398_WMP64 KB925454-IE501SP4-20061116.120000 KB925486-IE501SP4-20060918.174951 KB925902 KB926122 KB926436 KB927891 KB928843 KB929969-IE501SP4-20061220.120000 KB929969-IE6SP1-20061220.120000 KB930178 KB931768-IE501SP4-20070219.120000 KB931784 KB932168 KB933566-IE501SP4-20070530.120000 KB933566-IE6SP1-20070417.120000 KB933729 KB935839 KB935840 KB935966 KB936021 KB937143-IE6SP1-20070717.120000 KB937894 KB938127-IE6SP1-20070626.120000 KB938827 KB938829 KB939653-IE6SP1-20070817.120000 KB941202-OE6SP1-20070820.120000 KB941568 KB941672 KB942615-IE6SP1-20071029.120000 Q147222 Q828026 Update Rollup 1 Netcard queries test . . . . . . . : Passed [WARNING] The net card 'RAS Async Adapter' may not be working because it has not received any packets. Per interface results: Adapter : Local Area Connection 3 Netcard queries test . . . : Passed Host Name. . . . . . . . . : dc IP Address . . . . . . . . : 192.10.10.1 Subnet Mask. . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway. . . . . . : 192.10.10.2 Dns Servers. . . . . . . . : 192.10.10.1 AutoConfiguration results. . . . . . : Passed Default gateway test . . . : Passed NetBT name test. . . . . . : Passed No remote names have been found. WINS service test. . . . . : Skipped There are no WINS servers configured for this interface. Global results: Domain membership test . . . . . . : Passed NetBT transports test. . . . . . . : Passed List of NetBt transports currently configured: NetBT_Tcpip_{1BF16404-1A6D-4A22-A2DE-3F6705AEDB8C} 1 NetBt transport currently configured. Autonet address test . . . . . . . : Passed IP loopback ping test. . . . . . . : Passed Default gateway test . . . . . . . : Passed NetBT name test. . . . . . . . . . : Passed Winsock test . . . . . . . . . . . : Passed DNS test . . . . . . . . . . . . . : Failed [FATAL] File \config\netlogon.dns contains invalid DNS entries. [FATAL] No DNS servers have the DNS records for this DC registered. Redir and Browser test . . . . . . : Passed List of NetBt transports currently bound to the Redir NetBT_Tcpip_{1BF16404-1A6D-4A22-A2DE-3F6705AEDB8C} The redir is bound to 1 NetBt transport. List of NetBt transports currently bound to the browser NetBT_Tcpip_{1BF16404-1A6D-4A22-A2DE-3F6705AEDB8C} The browser is bound to 1 NetBt transport. DC discovery test. . . . . . . . . : Failed [FATAL] Cannot find DC in domain 'DENCO'. [ERROR_NO_SUCH_DOMAIN] DC list test . . . . . . . . . . . : Failed 'DENCO': Cannot find DC to get DC list from [test skipped]. Trust relationship test. . . . . . : Skipped Kerberos test. . . . . . . . . . . : Skipped 'DENCO': Cannot find DC to get DC list from [test skipped]. LDAP test. . . . . . . . . . . . . : Failed Cannot find DC to run LDAP tests on. The error occurred was: The specified domain either does not exist or could not be contacted. Bindings test. . . . . . . . . . . : Passed WAN configuration test . . . . . . : Skipped No active remote access connections. Modem diagnostics test . . . . . . : Passed IP Security test . . . . . . . . . : Passed IPSec policy service is active, but no policy is assigned. The command completed successfully Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176281
 - 12
 - Find all references to an AD group Does anyone know of a way to find all references to a certain group in Active Directory? I am trying to find all places where this group is used for permissions, rights, Group Policy, etc. I am trying to do this because I want to delete the domain local group that I have in place now and replace it with a global group, but I need to know where the group is currently being 'used'. Thanks! MG Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176276
 - 13
 - Deleting Group Policy I am running Win2K domain with SP4. Multiple sites with 5 domain servers. There was a problem with FRS for quite awhile which was resolved with a burflag fix. The problem is, it seems that during the period when FRS was not running correctly, all the domain controllers generated GPolicies (up until now, we have not been using GP, we are about to start using it) Now that the FRS is running correctly, if you go to \winnt\sysvol\sysvol\<domain> you see the following folders: Policies Policies_NTFRS_219e1ff8 Policies_NTFRS_2be1f54f Policies_NTFRS_2c93df07 Policies_NTFRS_a6d93220 Within each folder, there are copies of the same group policy. My question is, can I delete some of these? If so, which ones? Regards, Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176271
 - 14
 - Un-identified device on network I have a windows 200 Active Directory, with DNS and DHCP, where DHCP has scope of IP to auto allocates to the PCs Is there a way to prevent a DEVICE name or MAC address from obtaining an IP from DHCP? (Rather then removing DHCP scope, assigning physcial IP to workstations) When you configure a windows domain, there has to be better way to allow, and allocate resources based on membership, or policy etc. MC Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176269
 - 15
 - Sysvol replication on Windows 2000 Hi, I have 2 windows 2000 SP4 AD servers (dc1 and dc2), dc2 has 2 sysvo folders that are replicated with dc1. First one being where it shoul c:\winnt\sysvol.... and the second one being c:\sysvol. I think this i causing issues with policies running. I want to delete and sever the link for c:\sysvol, should I take th following steps: 1 Turn off File replication service on both dc1 and dc2 2 using linkd at command prompt - c:\linkd sysvol /d Will this remove the link in the file replication so it will onl replicate to the default directory? Or will it take out all sysvo folders on both dcs once I restart the File replication service? Thank -- damien ----------------------------------------------------------------------- damienm's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/member.php?userid=3714 View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/showthread.php?t=87280 http://forums.techarena.i Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176258
 - 16
 - How to figure out First Schema Master in domain I have 3 DC with windows 2000 Active Directory, and I am not sure which one was initially installed first. So, How can I find which DC is the actual SCHEMA Master? (installed first?) Thanks MC Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176254
 - 17
 - Account Lockout event log only recorded ... sometimes Hello, I've got my policy set up on Account Management success and Failure and I have been getting records in the event log when user accounts lock out (a 644 event) and I still get them, but it seems to be a hit-or-miss thing recently. If I weren't getting any, I would think the policy wasn't right, but it's an intermittent issue. I know about the event log bug, and I archive the logs with a VBscript every night so they don't get too big and start dropping them, but there is at least one account, and probably more, that is not recording the event of its locking out, and I need to see those so I can inform the developer the originating machine name. Any ideas? Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176252
 - 18
 - Migration from NT Mixed to 200 Native? Hi, and sorry for the vague post, but I'm really only starting to get a handle on things. I've just become "the I.T. guy" at a company, and their directory system is basically nonexistent right now. They upgraded from NT to 2K and a couple of the five servers are 2K3 now. But I just realized they never fully updated to a Win2K Native AD structure. I'm wondering if there are any "gotcha" moments I need to check for before I I make the decision about whether to upgrade the directory structure. One complicating factor I've run into, although it may not *really* matter: DHCP and DNS are run by our ISP. I do not have access to DNS records to see if SRV records can be created/supported, and I know just enough about AD to think this could be a problem. Guidance? Ideas? Suggestions? Whatever you can give would be greatly appreciated. -RØß- -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176251
 - 19
 - Install new font file I need to install a praticular font file for our check printer on each local workstation. The problem is one would need local admin right to do this and the users do not have this right by default. Instead of having to be at each physical computer is there another option via group policy or a script by chance? Remote desktop is not possible since the workstations are windows 2000. Any advice is much apprecaited. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176247
 - 20
 - Automate Install I'm not sure where else to tuen on this one so I figured I 'd take a shote posting the question here. An application we use we just updated to a new version and it turns out this new version requires a new version of java. My probelm is that the application automaticly pull down and trys to install this newest version from the install source. The problem is that we do not allow download rights or local administrative rights to our user base. This presents a problem on how to deploy this to the user base without having to individual install the application on each windows 2000 machine. I've adverted the download right by making the server where the install source for java is a trusted site and allowing downloads form the trusted site but can't figure a way to solve the local admin rights issue. Any sugestions on this? Is there a way to create a msi package for the java I need or automate the install using some for of an answer file? Can I install through group policy or a script? Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176246
 - 21
 - Lastlogon: Many DCs showing Identical Timestamp I am using the "Additional Account Info" tab on the AD Users and Computers GUI (acctinfo.dll) to compare Last Logon timestamp to the values that I get using Vbscript's Get method, and GetEx method (e.g. set objLogon = ousr.Get("lastLogon")). I am specifying a specific DC to query in the LDAP path in the Vbscript. I noticed that many user accounts have the identical timestamp on many DCs in the "Additional Account Info" tab on the DCs. How can this be? Also, the results will always match the output from the Get method, or the Getex method, but not both. There seems to be no pattern. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176243
 - 22
 - DCdiag reports "missing expected value" Hi, Have an interesting AD query. A genuis Help Desk support person added an XP pc to the domain with the same name as a remote site server and this XP PC managed to take over the site DC attributes i.e. FRS et al.. Using DCDIAG on one of my site servers (remote location WAN) reports the following: [1] Problem: Missing Expected Value Base Object: CN= GREENHUNDRED,OU=Domian Controllers,DC=apollo,DC=local Base object Description: "DC Account Object" Value Object Attribute Name: frsComputerReferenceBL Value Object Description: "SYSVOL FRS Member Object" See q312862 How can I remove/fix the error above? Thanks.. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176242
 - 23
 - Computer relationship to domain is lost have 5 computers that keep losing their domain relationship everytime they restart. Error message at logon is: 'Windows cannot connect to the domain, either because the domain controller is down or otherwise unavailable, or because your computer account was not found.' When I remove the computer from the domain and re-add it then I can log in with no problem until I log off again or restart the system then the same error message comes up. Client OS: WinXP SP2 Server OS: Windows Server 2003 Has any of you experienced this? I appreciate your help. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176239
 - 24
 - Account Replication between two Different Active Directory Domains I have an Active Directory Domain with 20,000 exchange mail user accounts, called foo.edu. I would now like to create a second new Active Directory Domain called school.edu and replicate foo.edu 20,000 exchange accounts to school.edu, to create a single sign on. Also changes made in either Active Directory would need to be replicated to the other Active Directory. Please help (Mike). Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176236
 - 25
 - create adm file Hello, we have problem with slow windows xp boot. I waits for the starting scripts. There is a possibility to create a registry entry to set this process assyncron. [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\policies\system] "RunStartupScriptSync"=dword:00000000 The problem is I tried this to put in a policy using reg2adm. It looks good, but with this policy it is not possible to set the value 0. Only 1 or higher. This is the result: ________________ CLASS MACHINE CATEGORY "SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\policies\system" KEYNAME "SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\policies\system" POLICY "RunStartupScriptSync" PART "RunStartupScriptSync" NUMERIC VALUENAME "RunStartupScriptSync" END PART END POLICY END CATEGORY _____________________ May someone has an idea? Thanks in advance Dirk Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176233
- Next
 - 1
 - AD replication issue ok here is what happened... in our remote datacenter, there was an electrical issue and lost power everything came back up ok, but the 2 dc's there (2003 SP2) that are older systems and the date reset to january 2002 (since fixed) this is the cause of the event below. i'm trying to determine the best way to resolve it. at the same time, users are being prompted for credentials when getting their mail. not sure if exchange (2003 SP2) is affected by this or if it's a separate issue here is the event: Event Type: Error Event Source: NTDS Replication Event Category: Replication Event ID: 2042 Date: 12/11/2007 Time: 2:55:46 PM User: NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON Computer: <computername> Description: It has been too long since this machine last replicated with the named source machine. The time between replications with this source has exceeded the tombstone lifetime. Replication has been stopped with this source. The reason that replication is not allowed to continue is that the two machine's views of deleted objects may now be different. The source machine may still have copies of objects that have been deleted (and garbage collected) on this machine. If they were allowed to replicate, the source machine might return objects which have already been deleted. Time of last successful replication: 2002-01-28 06:53:13 Invocation ID of source: 0478f6c8-f6b8-0478-0100-000000000000 Name of source: 8cf34e45-547f-48d8-9870-bc0d59d31827._msdcs.<domain>.com Tombstone lifetime (days): 60 The replication operation has failed. User Action: Determine which of the two machines was disconnected from the forest and is now out of date. You have three options: 1. Demote or reinstall the machine(s) that were disconnected. 2. Use the "repadmin /removelingeringobjects" tool to remove inconsistent deleted objects and then resume replication. 3. Resume replication. Inconsistent deleted objects may be introduced. You can continue replication by using the following registry key. Once the systems replicate once, it is recommended that you remove the key to reinstate the protection. Registry Key: HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\NTDS\Parameters\Allow Replication With Divergent and Corrupt Partner For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176226
 - 2
 - Implementing an approval workflow for delegating administration I'm looking for a solution to provide an approval process and audit tracking for a delegated OU. The scenario is: - client submits request for access change. - their manager approves - application owner approves - system implements the approved changes and logs who approved, what change, and when. Anyone know of a product or preferably open source project providing this functionality? Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176225
 - 3
 - Bulk Import from Lotus Hi, I'll try to expose you our situation: We have a native 2003 forest with one domain. Our main LDAP structure is a Lotus Domino Server 7.x that contains all relevant data from company users. We need to import some imperative users fields from Lotus to Active Directory users. Then we have some restrictions. In active Lotus there are a lot of users that don't match with Active Directory and also there are some users that don't exists in AD, then we have not to import lotus users fields to AD users fields. Is there any utilty to make easier this procedure?. May I script in anyway?. Thanks in advance. Regards. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176215
 - 4
 - Sysvol location I have a Windows 2003 domain. When I do a dfsutil /pktinfo the list of domain controllers for the sysvol referral do not have the same site DCs listed first. Should they be? Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176214
 - 5
 - Telephone section not visible via SEARCH, FOR PEOPLE I am using Window XP, on START, SEARCH, FOR PEOPLE, it only show some of the Active Directory information. Are there anyway to show the TELEPHONE section of Active Directory and allow me to update the 'mobile phone' information ? I am expecting the telephone information will flow onto Exchange which when I pull up the GAL, mobile phone information will be there eventually. Any comment and advice most appreciated. KL Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176213
 - 6
 - Error in LDAP Service. Help! Two messages are reported in the Event Viewer when I reboot my W2K Server: 1. The server failed to start due to an initialization error. Verify the configuration. Error description is: GetLastError()=997 : CreateAccount for Anonymous users. 2. Site Server LDAP Service cannot initialize the following object: GetLastError()=997 : Init LdapExtension. Then, the NetLogong service does not start automaticaly. Anyone can help? Thanks much, Leonardo Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176209
 - 7
 - Security Group not giving users access Here is my basic setup... I have a folder created for all departments in my organization. These folders are not shared. I have created a security group named after the folder. (ex. sales folder access) I then give full rights to this security group. I then place users in the group. For some reason this does not give them access to the folder. I have to give each user rights to the folder before it will work. Any ideas? Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176202
 - 8
 - Default Access Permissions to Active Directory All, what is the default permission to active directory or where can I look to find? Right now, any and all people in our IT Department can access Access Directory after installing the Admin Pak. Your help is appreciated. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176201
 - 9
 - DC Restore I had a problem about 2 weeks ago. I had 2 of 4 hard drives fail on my RAID 5 volume. I also did not have any spares for replacement so I had to wait a few days. The server is a second DC in this building, but one of 5 in my enviroment. I had decent backups of the server. When I recieved the drives I installed them, installed Windows 2000 Server and then did a restore from tape. This was at least 5 days after the failure. Now that the server is restored I have issues with clients connecting to shares regarding authentication. I have loads of errors in the event log regardign directory communication. I have tried doing a dcpromo and the authentication fails there as well. Is there something that I can do to resolve this issue? Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176200
 - 10
 - Pls help!! Problem of Rebuilding indices of Active Didectory Hi all I have a problem after installed SP2 for Windows server 2003, it always prompt "The Active directory is rebuilding indices" too long time when server starting up and show "SAM failed start the to TCP/IP or SPX/IPX litening thread" in system log. And I cannot ping this server from other PC and can ping other PC on this server, Anyone can tell me why and how to fixed it? thx very much for helping. Rgds Alan Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176190
 - 11
 - Search Distribution list owner Hi, We have a situation where one of the users have left the organisation and he used to be the manager for quite a number of Distribution lists. These distribution lists are part of different OUs, and we do not have a master list of the DLs he owned. Now, we would need to find out the diffferent DLs that he was the owner of and get that changed to a different owner. The challenge here is, there are close to 10000 DLs across the company and to make things worse, this employees account has now been deleted from AD. Thanks, Jai -- cooljai ------------------------------------------------------------------------ cooljai's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/member.php?userid=36607 View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/showthread.php?t=865411 http://forums.techarena.in Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176189
 - 12
 - Add New Computer Object With VBS Hey All! When creating a new computer object, we change the 'users/group can join this computer to a domain' option from 'Domain Admins' to 'Authenticated Users'. I'm trying to accomplish it with a script as shown below. If I leave out the defaultgroup line, the object gets created. When run with the defaultgroup I get an error - a constraint violation occurred. Am I using the correct attribute ('defaultGroup') to accomplish this and if so how do I fix it? If not, which attribute do I use? Thanks GHG Set objComputer = objContainer.Create("Computer", "cn=" & strComputer) objComputer.Put "sAMAccountName", strComputer & "$" objComputer.Put "Description", strDescription >> objComputer.Put "defaultGroup", "Authenticated Users" << objComputer.Put "userAccountControl", 4096 objComputer.SetInfo Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176183
 - 13
 - Possible breach Is there a way to see if someone added a user account to our active directory that dows not show in ADUC? Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176178
 - 14
 - User cannot change password - Resets itself. Hi, When I tick the user cannot change password attribute for different accounts in AD the option seems to reset itself after about 5 minutes. Does anyone have any ideas how I can fix this? Thanks, Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176176
 - 15
 - LED slim light box boost up your Christmas Day Advertisement Edlite Slim Light Boxes are the latest technology in lighting. To enable the light box to be so slim-line we use LED lamp & pencil thin fluorescent tubes. We have much confidence in our product. For CCFL series,they are our mature product,the crystal ED-P & ED-DP are the most salable ones.The transparence is the most selling point. For EEFL series,they are the growing product.In past,some EEFL slim light box have met a problem,the pressure is not so steady,now,we have deal with the problem.Now,the steady pressure ,and the big size ,the low current are the selling point of our EEFL slim light box. And the most salable series is the LED slim light box,the supper slim,only 11~20 mm thickness.The supper slim outlook & the Maintenance- free are the selling point. More detail,please mail:jenny@edlite.hk. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176165
 - 16
 - LED slim light box boost up your Christmas Day Advertisement Edlite Slim Light Boxes are the latest technology in lighting. To enable the light box to be so slim-line we use LED lamp & pencil thin fluorescent tubes. We have much confidence in our product. For CCFL series,they are our mature product,the crystal ED-P & ED-DP are the most salable ones.The transparence is the most selling point. For EEFL series,they are the growing product.In past,some EEFL slim light box have met a problem,the pressure is not so steady,now,we have deal with the problem.Now,the steady pressure ,and the big size ,the low current are the selling point of our EEFL slim light box. And the most salable series is the LED slim light box,the supper slim,only 11~20 mm thickness.The supper slim outlook & the Maintenance- free are the selling point. More detail,please mail:jenny@edlite.hk. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176164
 - 17
 - Compare Users in AD and Novell I have a Win2000 Server running Active DIrectory and another system running Netware 5.1. I have a problem of identifying users that are deleted as the system admin for novell might delete a user but did not inform the Active Directory side that the user has been deleted. Have read about the MSDSS but was wondering if there is any way i can just do a "report" that says user a , b , c was found in AD but not in Novell? In this case, i can re-verify that the the user a,b,c can be safely deleted in AD. Please advice. Cheers! Darence Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176154
 - 18
 - Unable to local DC ......... URGENT Hi, Urgently need solutions for the following error. Originally I have 2 DCs. Due to the fact that one of them have problem, so it was reformatted and promote as a 2nd DC again. I log in to windows as Adminsitrator user. Now I have many errors: (1.) On the new 2nd DC, i have error in system log every 2 min, Evend ID 16650 from source SAM stating "The account-identifier allocator failed to initialize properly. The record data contains the NT error code that caused the failure. Windows 2000 will retry the initialization until it succeeds; until that time, account creation will be denied on this Domain Controller. Please look for other SAM event logs that may indicate the exact reason for the failure." (2.) On both DCs, I have Event ID 3096 The Primary Domain COntroller for this domain could not be located. (3.) On both DCs, I'm also unable to open/access Domain Controller Security Policy or Domain Security Policy, error message Failed to open the Group Policy Object. You may not have appropriate rights. The specified domain either does not exist or could not be contacted. (4.) I execute DCdiag /v on the old DC, get the following Domain Controller Diagnosis Performing initial setup: * Verifying that the local machine NODE2, is a DC. * Connecting to directory service on server NODE2. * Collecting site info. * Identifying all servers. * Found 2 DC(s). Testing 1 of them. Done gathering initial info. Doing initial required tests Testing server: Default-First-Site-Name\NODE2 Starting test: Connectivity * Active Directory LDAP Services Check * Active Directory RPC Services Check ......................... NODE2 passed test Connectivity Doing primary tests Testing server: Default-First-Site-Name\NODE2 Starting test: Replications * Replications Check ......................... NODE2 passed test Replications Test omitted by user request: Topology Test omitted by user request: CutoffServers Starting test: NCSecDesc * Security Permissions Check for CN=Schema,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com * Security Permissions Check for CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com * Security Permissions Check for DC=TEST,DC=com ......................... NODE2 passed test NCSecDesc Starting test: NetLogons * Network Logons Privileges Check ......................... NODE2 passed test NetLogons Starting test: Advertising The DC NODE2 is advertising itself as a DC and having a DS. The DC NODE2 is advertising as an LDAP server The DC NODE2 is advertising as having a writeable directory The DC NODE2 is advertising as a Key Distribution Center Warning: NODE2 is not advertising as a time server. The DS NODE2 is advertising as a GC. ......................... NODE2 failed test Advertising Starting test: KnowsOfRoleHolders Role Schema Owner = CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com Warning: CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com is the Schema Owner, but is deleted. Role Domain Owner = CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com Warning: CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com is the Domain Owner, but is deleted. Role PDC Owner = CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com Warning: CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com is the PDC Owner, but is deleted. Role Rid Owner = CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com Warning: CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com is the Rid Owner, but is deleted. Role Infrastructure Update Owner = CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com Warning: CN="NTDS Settings DEL:4fc70a1f-be5d-436a-aaef-95e986d9b6f7",CN=NODE1,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fir st-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com is the Infrastructure Up date Owner, but is deleted. ......................... NODE2 failed test KnowsOfRoleHolders Starting test: RidManager * Available RID Pool for the Domain is 2111 to 1073741823 Warning: FSMO Role Owner is deleted. * NODE1.TEST.COM is the RID Master * DsBind with RID Master was successful * rIDAllocationPool is 1611 to 2110 * rIDNextRID: 1618 * rIDPreviousAllocationPool is 1611 to 2110 ......................... NODE2 passed test RidManager Starting test: MachineAccount * SPN found :LDAP/NODE2.TEST.COM/TEST.com * SPN found :LDAP/NODE2.TEST.COM * SPN found :LDAP/NODE2 * SPN found :LDAP/NODE2.TEST.COM/TEST * SPN found :LDAP/32158106-7989-4cff-8da4-8ff93c0e1831._msdcs.TEST.co m * SPN found :E3514235-4B06-11D1-AB04-00C04FC2DCD2/32158106-7989-4cff-8d a4-8ff93c0e1831/TEST.com * SPN found :HOST/NODE2.TEST.COM/TEST.com * SPN found :HOST/NODE2.TEST.COM * SPN found :HOST/NODE2 * SPN found :HOST/NODE2.TEST.COM/TEST * SPN found :GC/NODE2.TEST.COM/TEST.com ......................... NODE2 passed test MachineAccount Starting test: Services * Checking Service: Dnscache * Checking Service: NtFrs * Checking Service: IsmServ * Checking Service: kdc * Checking Service: SamSs * Checking Service: LanmanServer * Checking Service: LanmanWorkstation * Checking Service: RpcSs * Checking Service: RPCLOCATOR * Checking Service: w32time w32time Service is stopped on [NODE2] * Checking Service: TrkWks * Checking Service: TrkSvr * Checking Service: NETLOGON * Checking Service: Dnscache * Checking Service: NtFrs SMTPSVC Service is stopped on [NODE2] ......................... NODE2 failed test Services Test omitted by user request: OutboundSecureChannels Starting test: ObjectsReplicated NODE2 is in domain DC=TEST,DC=com Checking for CN=NODE2,OU=Domain Controllers,DC=TEST,DC=com in dom ain DC=TEST,DC=com on 1 servers Object is up-to-date on all servers. Checking for CN=NTDS Settings,CN=NODE2,CN=Servers,CN=Default-First- Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=TEST,DC=com in domain CN=Configuration, DC=TEST,DC=com on 1 servers Object is up-to-date on all servers. ......................... NODE2 passed test ObjectsReplicated Starting test: frssysvol * The File Replication Service Event log test The SYSVOL has been shared, and the AD is no longer prevented from starting by the File Replication Service. ......................... NODE2 passed test frssysvol Starting test: kccevent * The KCC Event log test Found no KCC errors in Directory Service Event log in the last 15 minut es. ......................... NODE2 passed test kccevent Starting test: systemlog * The System Event log test Found no errors in System Event log in the last 60 minutes. ......................... NODE2 passed test systemlog Running enterprise tests on : TEST.com Starting test: Intersite Skipping site Default-First-Site-Name, this site is outside the scope provided by the command line arguments provided. ......................... TEST.com passed test Intersite Starting test: FsmoCheck GC Name: \\NODE2.TEST.COM Locator Flags: 0xe00001bc Warning: DcGetDcName(PDC_REQUIRED) call failed, error 1355 A Primary Domain Controller could not be located. The server holding the PDC role is down. Warning: DcGetDcName(TIME_SERVER) call failed, error 1355 A Time Server could not be located. The server holding the PDC role is down. Warning: DcGetDcName(GOOD_TIME_SERVER_PREFERRED) call failed, error 1355 A Good Time Server could not be located. KDC Name: \\NODE2.TEST.COM Locator Flags: 0xe00001bc ......................... TEST.com failed test FsmoCheck Thanks & Regards Jolyn Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176151
 - 19
 - can't promote to domain controllers I am having trouble promoting a computer to domain controller in a network that already has 2 DCs. The Active Directory Installation Wizard says, "The version of the Active Directory schema of the source forest is not compatible with the version of Active Direcotyr on this computer." and it suggests that I use ADPREP. When I run ADPREP on the PDC in any of the 3 configurations, it says, "Forest-wide information has already been updated." or "Domain-wide information has already been updated." My only idea is that the existing DCs are Windows Server 2003 and I am promoting Windows Server 2003 R2. Could the R2 vs R1 be the issue or is there something else? Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176149
 - 20
 - Problems to Add users to group Hello, We have and environment with Windows 2000 servers where some user's have special permissions on groups to add and remove members. ADUC is published under Citrix for that users, currently one of those users is having trouble when trying to add or remove group members, the following error message appears: Picker cannot open because it cannot determine whether weleudc2.we.interbrew.net is joined to a domain" weleudc2 is the domain controller If user closes the error message and then click on add button again, the message does not appear and he can continue working normally. I have tried the same operation with my account and the problem does not happens, have also forced AD to user another domain controller. I have noticed that the following error appears on DC security log: Eventid: 565 Source: Directory Service Access Type: Failure Description: Object Open: Object Server: DS Object Type: %{00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000} Object Name: OU=File Shares,OU=User Managed Groups,OU=User Groups,OU=Groups,OU=WE1 Region,DC=we,DC=interbrew,DC=net New Handle ID: - Operation ID: {0,899513655} Process ID: 316 Primary User Name: WELEUDC2$ Primary Domain: WEINTERBREW Primary Logon ID: (0x0,0x3E7) Client User Name: TAP Client Domain: WEINTERBREW Client Logon ID: (0x0,0x3599C3D4) Accesses Create Child Already took a look at: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/816818 but this does not help Any comments will be appreciated. Thanks. Douglas Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176146
 - 21
 - Disaster recovery and NTDSUTIL This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0048_01C82DC8.FD5563C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I''m tryin' to find a solution for the flw scenario: 1st W2K server : ( file server) - logged as directory services restore mode - ntdsutil recovery failed couse the DBinitializate Jet failed error - 5= 30 - eseutil failed - no backup of sytem state - now machine out of domain and in a work group - accounts can reach it running his ip adress 2nd W2K server ( exchange server) operational - accounts logging on to this machine - machine in domain as 2nd PDC Thanks for the help DINO ------=_NextPart_000_0048_01C82DC8.FD5563C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859= -1"> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16544" name=3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY>  I''m tryin' to find a solu= tion for the flw scenario: 1st W2K server : ( file server) - logged as dire= ctory services restore mode - ntdsutil recovery failed couse the DBinitiali= zate Jet failed error - 530 - eseutil failed - no backup of sytem state = - now machine out of domain and in a work group - accounts can reach it run= ning his ip adress 2nd W2K server ( exchange server) operational - acco= unts logging on to this machine - machine in domain as 2nd PDC Than= ks for the help DINO </BODY></HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0048_01C82DC8.FD5563C0-- Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176143
 - 22
 - change domain for a dc hello on my site i have 2 domains ocap.loc and icap.loc i want to migrate a server from one domain to the other he is a dc for icap.loc can you confirm that i should not have problem if i do tis : 1) demote the server from icap.loc 2) remote the server as a Dc for ocap.loc thanks -- nt Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176137
 - 23
 - how to remove network error Hello Friends, I am Sachin lad from mumbai. I have one query regarding the emulator. While i am running the emulator i have got one error that general network error.check your network documentation. Can u tell me the answer of this qoestion. Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176133
 - 24
 - DCPROMO Error Hi all, I have 6 Domain controller in Windows 2000 Advanced Server. All of them I sets as Global Catalog. One of them get failure in the hardware and I didn't have full backup. I try to fresh install the windows but I get error when running DCPromo "The replication operations encountered a database error" In the event viewer I see error in NTDS General with Event ID 1168. Could you help me to fix this problem? Best regards, Cahya Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176131
 - 25
 - Tools to Monitor AD account lock/unlock information As far as I remember, there's a AD tools to monitor AD account in mutiple servers, so we are able to know that my account was locked by which DC. but now I dont know the tools name and which to download it? thanks in advance. Bruce Tag: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? Tag: 176116

dear all,

i've a Win2000 AD built up 2 years ago and the nt4 pdc is still left
inside the AD under "Active Directory Users and Computers" --> "Domain
Controllers". i want to delete it from the AD, however, i got an
error saying "DSA object cannot be deleted." how can i clean this up?
thx in advance!!! and happy new year to u all!!!

regards,
LM

Top

Re: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? by Meinolf

Meinolf
Mon Dec 31 13:47:37 PST 2007

Hello lisamok@gmail.com,

Is it only an entry or does it really exist as a physical machine?

Best regards

Meinolf Weber
Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no rights.
** Please do NOT email, only reply to Newsgroups
** HELP us help YOU!!! http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

> dear all,
>
> i've a Win2000 AD built up 2 years ago and the nt4 pdc is still left
> inside the AD under "Active Directory Users and Computers" --> "Domain
> Controllers". i want to delete it from the AD, however, i got an
> error saying "DSA object cannot be deleted." how can i clean this up?
> thx in advance!!! and happy new year to u all!!!
>
> regards,
> LM

Top

Re: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? by AaronSankey

AaronSankey
Mon Dec 31 09:43:27 PST 2007

The steps at a high level:

The NT4 PDC needs to be demoted to a BDC
One of the 2000 AD DCs needs to attain the PDC master role
The NT4 DC needs to be removed and de-commissioned

If you are running a Windows 2000 domain and the NT4 PDC is still up,
you have gotten into some shenanigans, but you are going to have to
demote the PDC to a BDC. If this was taken care of two years ago, you
are going to need to locate the PDC emulator as outlined here:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/234790

If these steps don't tell you where the PDC emulator is, you should run
them on each AD DC to rule out a funky replication problem. If there is
truly no PDC emulator, or if you have just demoted the NT4 PDC to a BDC,
you will have to sieze the PDC emulator role with one of the AD DCs as
outlined here:

http://tinyurl.com/4da5e

NT4 DCs don't have a DC promo function -- or an "un"promo funtion -- so
the easiest way to remove them is to turn them off and then remove the
DC from the replication list by doing the "Procedure 2: Windows 2000
(All versions) Windows Server 2003 RTM" steps for a (from
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/216498):

After this is done, sometimes the computer is still visable in ADU&C.
You can fix this with ADSI Edit. ADSI Edit is part of the support
tools, which are on the Windows 2000 Server CD:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301423

After it is installed:

1. Click start - Programs - Windows Support Tools - ADSI Edit
2. Expand Domain NC, expand dc=domain,dc=com and then expand
ou=domain controllers (or whatever OU the DC is in)
3. Delete the computer object

You will get a dialogue box (I forget what it says at the moment), but
if you enter through and then delete the object again, it will all be
gone.

Then you have to
Then you are done.

I hope that helps,

--
AaronSankey

Top

Re: how to remove nt4 pdc from Win2000 AD? by Jorge

Jorge
Tue Jan 01 07:36:22 PST 2008

if the PDC was upgraded to a w2k DC, then you installed a new w2k DC, then
you removed all the nt4 dcs, then you removed the upgraded DC (so it is not
longer alive)

and that object is still there, then you can delete it using adsiedit.msc

it does depend how that DC was removed...

start with doing a metadata cleanup, for that see:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/216498

--

Cheers,
(HOPEFULLY THIS INFORMATION HELPS YOU!)

# Jorge de Almeida Pinto # MVP Windows Server - Directory Services

BLOG (WEB-BASED)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/default.aspx
BLOG (RSS-FEEDS)--> http://blogs.dirteam.com/blogs/jorge/rss.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* How to ask a question --> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=555375
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties and confers no rights!
* Always test before implementing!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#################################################
#################################################
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<lisamok@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:98321b51-b3be-417e-a9df-1dba84fefc43@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> dear all,
>
> i've a Win2000 AD built up 2 years ago and the nt4 pdc is still left
> inside the AD under "Active Directory Users and Computers" --> "Domain
> Controllers". i want to delete it from the AD, however, i got an
> error saying "DSA object cannot be deleted." how can i clean this up?
> thx in advance!!! and happy new year to u all!!!
>
> regards,
> LM

Top