Re: [FATAL] Kerberos does not have a ticket for "SERVER"$ Error -
From: NickN (NickN_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 07/10/05
- Previous message: Art: "Re: Lock down Win2K Box on a LAN?"
- In reply to: Steve Duff [MVP]: "Re: [FATAL] Kerberos does not have a ticket for "SERVER"$ Error - Netd"
- Next in thread: Steve Duff [MVP]: "Re: [FATAL] Kerberos does not have a ticket for "SERVER"$ Error -"
- Reply: Steve Duff [MVP]: "Re: [FATAL] Kerberos does not have a ticket for "SERVER"$ Error -"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 05:00:03 -0700
Steve, thanks for he respone. Everything is pointing to a netdiag bug .
And Charlie, below, is right. If I believed the benefits of using W2K3 with
Ex2003 justified the $1000 justified thw price tag, I would use it,.e.g. I
find Terminal Services in 2k3 much better than in 2k. However, by saving the
$1000 I can put that towards something else. I find that when I lay out these
kinds of savings to my CEO & show where the money that was saved was then
used, when it comes to getting the latest & greatest, when I need it, I get
no argument from him as he trusts I am doing it for the right reasons. I know
that in many organizations (that still seem to have money to burn) this might
not be an approach that has any benefit, but when working for a small,
privately held, $25M company it gets noticed & is appreciated. I still buy
the CALs of the newest OS as these, generally, can be "dumbed down" to the OS
of the previous generation.
Regards & my thanks,
Nick.
"Steve Duff [MVP]" wrote:
> I believe you are seeing the same problem, and it is a netdiag 2000 bug. Unless you are seeing server events logged relating to this
> or you are having authentication or replication problems and the error is strictly from netdiag I wouldn't be too worried about it.
> (If you have other symptoms that is definitely a different story.)
>
> Curiousity compels me though it isn't related to your question: if you already have a 2003 domain I assume you already have CALs and
> so I'm wondering why would you be installing 2K Server to host Exchange 2003? The improvements for Exchange 2003 under Server 2003
> are modest but still valuable.
>
> Steve Duff, MCSE, MVP
> Ergodic Systems, Inc.
>
> "NickN" <NickN@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:0C3B3E64-E401-47C0-B792-D165DBB409B3@microsoft.com...
> >I would seem to be suffering the exact opposite of KB article 870692. I have
> > prepared a new Windows 2000 member server in a Windows 2003 domain (reusing
> > an old 2000 licence) I am running through the checklist before I install
> > Exchange 2003 on this box & get the above error when running netdiag.
> > Microsoft acknowledges the problem in the KB article above when it is a 2003
> > member server in a 2000 domain. If checked the event viewer, turned on
> > security auditing & kerberos auditing to no avail. Tried klist ticket, klist
> > tgt etc. - doesn't seem to be an issue here. I've forced kerberos to use TCP
> > & not UDP. Not sure where to go next unless this is an artifact of the same
> > bug as mentioned in the KB article.
> >
> > Does anyone have similar experience to mine? Any help gratefully accepted.
> > Nick.
>
>
>
- Previous message: Art: "Re: Lock down Win2K Box on a LAN?"
- In reply to: Steve Duff [MVP]: "Re: [FATAL] Kerberos does not have a ticket for "SERVER"$ Error - Netd"
- Next in thread: Steve Duff [MVP]: "Re: [FATAL] Kerberos does not have a ticket for "SERVER"$ Error -"
- Reply: Steve Duff [MVP]: "Re: [FATAL] Kerberos does not have a ticket for "SERVER"$ Error -"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|