locked
RIS and naming policy RRS feed

  • Question

  • HI folks,
    I'm looking for a solution to our lifecycle computer process Here's the setup:
    1- we use Windows 2003 RIS /PXE to install Windwos Xp to our station
    2- We configure the naming policy to auto-generate the name by incremental

    the problem i have, is when  a computer is remove from AD, because it's retired from production ,  the next computer that we RIS will get the name of that pc. Thats because RIS is lokoing for the next name available.... We dont want the name bere-distribute...

    so, do we have to keep all the computer objects  in AD to make sure that the name is not given?
    or change our policy name ? ( i dont like this one!!)

    thanks for your input

    Dave
    Tuesday, March 9, 2010 8:26 PM

Answers

  • Hi,

     

    I am afraid that if you do not change the policy, you cannot prevent new computers from getting the removed computer names.

     

    One workaround is: After you remove the computers from AD, pre-stage the computer names in AD first so that new computers will not get these names.

     

    For administrative purpose, you can store these computers in a particular OU.

     

    Hope it helps.

     

    Tim Quan - MSFT

     

     

    • Marked as answer by Tim Quan Monday, March 15, 2010 1:36 AM
    Wednesday, March 10, 2010 9:06 AM

All replies

  • Hi,

     

    I am afraid that if you do not change the policy, you cannot prevent new computers from getting the removed computer names.

     

    One workaround is: After you remove the computers from AD, pre-stage the computer names in AD first so that new computers will not get these names.

     

    For administrative purpose, you can store these computers in a particular OU.

     

    Hope it helps.

     

    Tim Quan - MSFT

     

     

    • Marked as answer by Tim Quan Monday, March 15, 2010 1:36 AM
    Wednesday, March 10, 2010 9:06 AM
  • hi,

    thanks, pre-staged sounds like a good thing.

    about storing and keeping computers in a OU, is it a good practice? the database will grow quickly and
    <object id="tts_object" width="18" height="18" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://www.gstatic.com/translate/sound_player.swf" id="tts_object" width="18" height="18"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.gstatic.com/translate/sound_player.swf" /> <param name="flashvars" value="sound_name=" /> <param name="wmode" value="transparent" /> <param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /> </object>
    significantly?
    Wednesday, March 10, 2010 1:45 PM
  • Hi,


    Thank you for the reply.
     

    Only for your administrative convenience, I suggest storing these non-existing computers in a particular OU. In this way, you can easily find these non-existing computers. Of course the database will grow if more and more objects are created in AD. However, to work around your requirements, I am afraid this is the only method.

     

    Tim Quan - MSFT

     

    Friday, March 12, 2010 6:50 AM