Pitfalls - AD domain.local

[kapt]

Is there any pitfalls to establishing an AD domain using the .local extension? Should I use a .com instead? My organization has several internet domain names that are available to use. Problem is we have an NT4 domain that uses our parent domain name. Just doesn't have the .com on it. Would there be a conflict if I named the new AD domain (CURRENTDOMAIN.COM)? I built a full test environment with Exchange, SQL, etc. but with domain.local as my AD domain name. I am ready to roll it out, but wanted to make sure there won't be any problems with this setup. Sorry for the long message... any comments apreciated!

Thanks,
Kapt

 

[artfulbodger]

Well, the one pitfall that I know of first hand is that Mac OS X clients will not attach to it. There is a workaround, but since this was a new installation and hadn't gotten too far in the install, I just started over with a .office

Worked fine after that.

 

[mrdenny]

The current recommendation is that you don't use .com. This seperates the office network from the public network.

This makes it harder for attackers to use dns to get in.

Denny
MCSA (2003) / MCDBA (SQL 2000)

--Anything is possible. All it takes is a little research. (Me)

http://www.mrdenny.com

(My very old site)

 

[dvannoy]

I am having a hard time figuring out what to call the AD. would you guys use .office or .local? .local seems to be MS's way. I am doing a slow migration from novell.

Thanks

 

[mrdenny]

Anything can be used. It's best to use something that can't resolved from the internet.

My preference is .local or .int.

Denny
MCSA (2003) / MCDBA (SQL 2000)

--Anything is possible. All it takes is a little research. (Me)

http://www.mrdenny.com

Donate to Katrina relief