Auto Logoff

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.setup (More info?)

I am trying to find out if MS kept the old feature in Win NT4 Server that
allowed a user with sufficient privileges to prevent auto logoff.
As I recall in NT4 Server, you could set the user to be logged off at say 8
pm, but users could also be allowed to either prevent the logoff snooze the
logoff or log back in after the logoff.

I would like to disconnect all the workstations from my network at say 9 PM
each night, but occasionally directors will be working until the wee hours,
and if I knock them off they are going to pitch a fit

In this case, just setting logon hours does not seem to be the correct
approach

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.setup (More info?)

Logon hours are set in Win2k at the user level, so you can apply different
logon hours to each user and you don´t have to "cut everyone with the same
blade", but even if you set similar logon hours to everyone, there is a
security policiy (look at the security options section on the machine
policy) to force logoff when logon hours expire. You may apply this policy
to everyone and fiter out managers to keep them excempt of being logged off
when logon hours expire.
Hope this helps,
Robert

Roberto Ruiz
Brainbench MVP for WinNT Workstation
http://www.brainbench.com

"Ther Richardson" <ther_richardson@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:108q09b1bsrsn51@corp.supernews.com...
> I am trying to find out if MS kept the old feature in Win NT4 Server that
> allowed a user with sufficient privileges to prevent auto logoff.
> As I recall in NT4 Server, you could set the user to be logged off at say
8
> pm, but users could also be allowed to either prevent the logoff snooze
the
> logoff or log back in after the logoff.
>
> I would like to disconnect all the workstations from my network at say 9
PM
> each night, but occasionally directors will be working until the wee
hours,
> and if I knock them off they are going to pitch a fit
>
> In this case, just setting logon hours does not seem to be the correct
> approach
>
>