Re: 2003 Standard CA Stand Alone Vs. Enterprise
From: Steven L Umbach (n9rou_at_nospam-comcast.net)
Date: 02/15/05
- Next message: Steven L Umbach: "Re: Remote Desktop security"
- Previous message: Steven L Umbach: "Re: The local policy of this system does not allow you to log on interactively"
- In reply to: Griff: "2003 Standard CA Stand Alone Vs. Enterprise"
- Next in thread: Griff: "Re: 2003 Standard CA Stand Alone Vs. Enterprise"
- Reply: Griff: "Re: 2003 Standard CA Stand Alone Vs. Enterprise"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 21:33:29 -0600
An Enterprise CA makes more sense for an AD domain. Windows 2003 Standard
however does not have the more advanced feature of Windows 2003 Enterprise,
namely version 2 templates which can be used for autoenrollment for users
and computers. You can however enable automatic request for computer
certificates via Group Policy. --- Steve
"Griff" <Griff@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:ADD7F834-9C85-46E9-9B03-AE81656A9D3E@microsoft.com...
> My company wants to secure VPN traffic and executive emails using
> certificates. With the limitations of 2003 standard, can I do this? If so
> should I install the CA as an Enterprise or stand alone? Thanks
- Next message: Steven L Umbach: "Re: Remote Desktop security"
- Previous message: Steven L Umbach: "Re: The local policy of this system does not allow you to log on interactively"
- In reply to: Griff: "2003 Standard CA Stand Alone Vs. Enterprise"
- Next in thread: Griff: "Re: 2003 Standard CA Stand Alone Vs. Enterprise"
- Reply: Griff: "Re: 2003 Standard CA Stand Alone Vs. Enterprise"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
