AD site configuration for stretched vLAN

  • 208 Views
  • Last Post 16 March 2018
ahobbs posted this 16 March 2018

Hey all

I have a question around AD Site configuration over a stretched vLAN,

We have 2 x physical datacenters and each one contains 2 x Windows 2016 domain controllers (1 x physical server and 1 x virtual server)

The virtual servers are located on a stretched VLAN as it uses NSX capabilities.

At the moment we have 2 x AD Sites (SITE A and SITE B) created and the DC objects reflect their physical site status.

The stretched vLAN subnet is assigned to SITE A, so this means the other virtual DC is located in a site where it’s subnet is not defined.

Should I have 3 x AD Sites created? SITE A and SITE B containing their physical DCs and SITE C containing the virtual servers
Or should I move the other virtual DC to SITE A where the subnet is defined?

Any pros/cons for either configuration? Or best practice recommendations?

Thanks

AForum info: http://www.activedir.org
Problems unsubscribing? Email admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
amulnick posted this 16 March 2018

To me, it's a question of latency and overall how the speed of the service is perceived.  Generally, if you extended the lan, it should be expected to be low latency meaning you could place them in one site.  
Do you trust the latency to be consistent?  If so, keep your administration as simple as possible and add the vdc to site a.  
Why do you have the physical dc's in addition to the virtual?  That seems to be some relevant information not yet shared.  Performance?  


show

ahobbs posted this 16 March 2018

We have a 10GB pipe between the two sites, which we use for data replication but ultimately the intention is to use SRM.
Not 100% sure why we have physicals I didn’t purchase or provision the servers, a sub contractor did. He also did the AD site configuration so I’m questioning it.
I think I’ll add the virtual to Site A but this will leave a single DC in its own physical site. I’m wondering as the link between sites is pretty decent whether we could put all the DCs into a single site?
Sent from my iPhone
On 16 Mar 2018, at 14:14, Al Mulnick <amulnick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To me, it's a question of latency and overall how the speed of the service is perceived.  Generally, if you extended the lan, it should be expected to be low latency meaning you could place them in one site.  
Do you trust the latency to be consistent?  If so, keep your administration as simple as possible and add the vdc to site a.  
Why do you have the physical dc's in addition to the virtual?  That seems to be some relevant information not yet shared.  Performance?  


show

bdesmond posted this 16 March 2018

It sounds like a single site would be fine assuming the latency is acceptable

 



Thanks,

Brian Desmond

 

w – 312.625.1438 | c – 312.731.3132



 

show

amulnick posted this 16 March 2018

I agree that a single site sounds fine for what you're doing.  I don't want to undersell the concept of latency vs. potential bandwidth.  You should really check with the network team for that.  I work with several applications that could overwhelm that 10GB pipe and then some, driving latency through the roof.  I don't know your business, so I'm covering the bases.  


show

Close