AD Committee Meeting
September 10, 2002
Attendees:
John Sawyer Environmental Horticulture
Mark Palmer Provost
Mark Ross Plant Pathology
Kevin Hill Immokalee
Mike Kanofsky ITNS
Joe Hayden FACOPS
Steve Lasley Entomology
David Ayers IT/District Support
Dwight Jesseman IT
Dean Delker IT/NS
Sherry Hays College of Agricultural and Life Sciences
Jarrod Morgan College of Agricultural and Life Sciences
Jack Kramer Ft. Lauderdale via streaming audio
Old Business:
Previous meeting minutes were approved. An update on the IFASDOM environment enumeration was not covered due to Tim and Chris not attending the meeting.
Questionaire: Sherry will put together a tally of answers that were given. Editorialize it.
Project documentation: Steve mentioned that he had added a few links to the web page “Links to AD articles”. Enumeration results by domain and AD development and Testing were added.
Project timeline – Kevin gave a brief overview of the timeline. Steve mentioned that we will be working on a preliminary budget for the next ITPAC committee meeting in October. Steve said that we should probably come up with a dollar amount for the servers we will need up front to set up testing of the AD project. Steve mentioned that we needed to add Security Policy and work with UF concerning configuration changes. Mark suggested that we ghost the Meta directory timeline over the timeline Kevin put together. Obtaining a consultant was brought up and UF put together a draft proposal asking for personnel, office, machines, IFAS wouldn’t have to worry about the root. Kevin said that the timeline was very basic – can be added to as we go along.
New Business:
Preliminary Budget
Hardware – rather than specking out machines, we need to figure out how many machines we need first. Initially, two servers for root, two machines for global directory. Need super robust machines – buy a machine and replace with more robust machine and move the first machine down to other department.
Opened up the Proposed AD Budget template to fill out as we talk. The template can be found at: \\ad.ufl.edu\ifas\PRIVATE\ICC\OldADplanningShare\ProposedADBudget1.xls
If you have a UF root and have three domains below that, if you don’t populate UF root with Exchange 2000 (global catalog), it has to tie to a level above. You have to have them talking to each other.
Kevin asked Mike to look into the Exchange 2000 idea, see what the advantage will be. There are definitely advantages to build it in to the AD rollout. Mike will look into licensing prices and hardware cost.
Do we need to budget for WinNet, other miscellaneous software?
There was talk to breakdown the Domain Controllers to domain and print sharing servers. We may need to look into increasing the CIR’s in the IT computer room.
Claude’s contribution – find out what it would cost to bring up all REC’s to current T1 connections.
FTEs
– support personnel.
SMS
(system management server) – need more personnel – recommend at least 6 people
to keep this up These will be recurring
costs.
SQL
software –
Training
– bring in someone from outside to teach AD campus-wide. 5 day classes – price? Three sessions – 20 people each.
Get
a test environment set up and get training and go into the test environment
immediately. Make each class
customized.
Consultant
– maybe have a person from another land grant university that has recently gone
through an AD migration come and tell us what really happened with their
installation.
Put out a query asking if
there is anyone here at UF that has extensive knowledge on AD to see if they
would consult with us on AD.
Continued AD Design
Discussions:
Kevin brought up on the
screen an empty root for win.ufl.edu that you would populate with OU containers
for student (and Faculty/staff accounts).
Make the names of each
domain reflect correct name of department.
Or, just make each branch domain 1, domain 2, etc.
It was mentioned that to
keep the users and domain spaces separate for security purposes. The Stanford proposal could be included in
the UF proposal with duplication in the Stanford proposal, but would allow
domain controllers to go either through the user or the OU to make updates
and/or changes.
Upon delegating control to
domains, they (using the above proposal) will now have authentication in two
domains instead of one domain only. Will
depend on naming conventions (administrator ID or group) (i.e.use a certain
format, identifier, enterprise admin).
Will not have single
sign-on until we have a global directory with id and full name.
Security needs to be
wrapped up before gatorlink will be secure.
(changing passwords, etc.) People
who do not work for UF will have local accounts set up for them.
Dot.net throws in cross
forest trusts. Other domains are
transitive.
Another proposal on the AD
tree would be to have all the users in a local domain. Put all students in the root.
Steve has not seen a
design that populates user containers with an external source. He asked everyone to look around and see if
they can find a proposal that shows this.
We need a contact that
can answer questions about Kerberos, ask them to attend our next meeting.
Assignments:
Kevin and Mike are going
to look at different site topologys.
Kevin asked Mike to look
into the Exchange 2000 idea, see what the advantage will be. There are definitely advantages to build it
in to the AD rollout. Mike will look
into licensing prices and hardware cost.
Claude’s contribution –
find out what it would cost to bring up all REC’s to current T1
connections.
Sherry is going to work on
questionnaire summary.
We need enumeration.
Training opportunities –
need costs.
Next meeting date is October 8th.
Meeting was adjourned.