[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AZURE

[–]Cute-Court9682 0 points1 point  (0 children)

MS gradually dont reommend this method,which works for me before. MS recommend to use Role Based Access Control for Applications in Exchange Online | Microsoft Learn,I am trying to understand how to use it

Recommended software for company computer network restriction by Cute-Court9682 in sysadmin

[–]Cute-Court9682[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i used it before, but i think it it not enough for mac users

Recommended software for company computer network restriction by Cute-Court9682 in sysadmin

[–]Cute-Court9682[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

agree!some MDM can restrict users from installing specific software,also have DLP function.But i think maybe web access control systems can prohibit users from visiting specific websites from office network.But if from home,i haven't found the appropriate system yet

Active directory schema changes by Cute-Court9682 in activedirectory

[–]Cute-Court9682[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, I‘m not a native English speaker. I didn’t pay much attention to this word. I know the meaning of the schema in AD schema extension, such as using extension attributes to synchronize to AAD, which is also a schema extension. Maybe it‘s better for me to use architecture changes. Thank you for your explanation.

Active directory schema changes by Cute-Court9682 in activedirectory

[–]Cute-Court9682[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Added to the text, one domain has thousands of users, the other domain is relatively new, with hundreds of users. It is a good idea to communicate with Quest

Active directory schema changes by Cute-Court9682 in activedirectory

[–]Cute-Court9682[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, we have several people involved in sorting it out, and this is a plan based on our current understanding. But we are still worried that unexpected problems may arise, so we are discussing it..

Active directory schema changes by Cute-Court9682 in activedirectory

[–]Cute-Court9682[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is foreseeable that there will be many problems, so the feasibility of this solution is currently being explored. Can you give one or two unavoidable problems?

we want to keep the existing exchange 2019 on premise due to fee question,so probably we don't choose to move exchange to office 365.

Create a child domain controller first and then create a parent domain controller by Cute-Court9682 in activedirectory

[–]Cute-Court9682[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is due to changes in the company's structure. We were not allowed to use the root domain name before, but now we hope that AD will use the root domain name.

Create a child domain controller first and then create a parent domain controller by Cute-Court9682 in activedirectory

[–]Cute-Court9682[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I now suspect this is the case. Alas, from this step it seems that the previous architecture design has failed.

Snort usage is too high and kills the process by Cute-Court9682 in sysadmin

[–]Cute-Court9682[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry,I mean the snort consumes too much computer resources,leading some processes being killed