Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory (More info?)
We have successfully set up a trust relationship between a NT4 domain and W2K
forest. The trust relationship works fine but we need to permission certain
resources in the NT4 with users from the W2K domain as part of the migration
process. In (NT4) User Manager we can see some users (generally admin and
service account types) and W2K global groups but no normal users are shown.
Additionally when we look into some of the (populated) 2K groups we see no
users in them (although we know they are there). We have to manually type in
the domain\username when permissioning rather than having to pick from a
list. I would imagine it is something to do with OU containers but anyone
brighter than me is welcome to fill me in on what is going on here.
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory (More info?)
Customized permission of object may can cause this issue.
--
Regards
Christoffer Andersson
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
No email replies please - reply in the newsgroup
------------------------------------------------
http://www.chrisse.se - Active Directory Tips
"JWM" <JWM@discussions.microsoft.com> skrev i meddelandet
newsB016C44-D741-4EE6-B220-E35A65B0B999@microsoft.com...
> We have successfully set up a trust relationship between a NT4 domain and
> W2K
> forest. The trust relationship works fine but we need to permission
> certain
> resources in the NT4 with users from the W2K domain as part of the
> migration
> process. In (NT4) User Manager we can see some users (generally admin and
> service account types) and W2K global groups but no normal users are
> shown.
> Additionally when we look into some of the (populated) 2K groups we see no
> users in them (although we know they are there). We have to manually type
> in
> the domain\username when permissioning rather than having to pick from a
> list. I would imagine it is something to do with OU containers but anyone
> brighter than me is welcome to fill me in on what is going on here.
>
> Thanks
>
> JWM
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.