Upgrading thru all version of Windows......server and domain controller


Recommended Posts

Ive seen a couple of videos of people that upgrade client versions of Windows (even DOS) to Windows 8.1 or 10.

Im gonna try to do the same with the Windows servers........and take it a step up with domain controllers and active directory.

This is just for fun and learning purposes. Nothing at the end of the day and of course, this should never be used in a real life scenario.

My scenario is:

- VMWare Workstation

- Ill make a virtual network only for this

- 1 domain controller, 1 domain client

- Start from the oldest possible server/domain controller (Windows NT 3.1 Advanced Server) and upgrade to the latest possible server/domain controller ("Windows Server 10 Technical Preview")

- Start from oldest possible client that can join a domain (Windows NT 3.1) and upgrade* to the latest possible client that can join a domain (Windows 10).

* Upgrades will ONLY be done when the client cannot logon to the domain. What I mean by this is that Ill first install Windows NT 3.1 and Windows NT 3.1 Advanced Server. Ill upgrade Advance Server to the next version and check if I can logon. If I cant, Ill upgrade the client and recheck again. Meaning I want to upgrade the client as less as possible. If Windows NT 3.1 can logon to Windows Server 10 Technical Preview, awesome.

- On the server side, minimum features/changes will be installed/configured to check if they go thru the upgrade: Server name, admin user name/pass, client user name/pass, etc...

- Later versions of server/DC/AC, require some things that weren't available/needed. Windows NT 3.1 obviously doesn't need PDC Emulator but later versions of Active Directory, do. Those will be added/enabled STRICTLY as required. Also compatibility layers for previous clients will always be enabled to ensure that our oldest clients can logon/join.

- Server list:

Windows NT 3.1 Advance Server (All continuous operating systems will be the server version, first server and domain controller that will be installed)

Windows NT 3.5

Windows NT 3.51

Windows NT 4.0

Windows 2000 (first time Active Directory will be implemented)

Windows 2003 (or R2, I dont think there is MUCH differences in domain services between non R2 and R2 right?)

Windows 2008 R2

Windows 2012 R2

"Windows Server 10 Technical Preview"

- Client list:

Windows NT 3.1 (My goal is to stay on this version till Windows Server 10 Technical Preview)

Windows NT 3.5

Windows NT 3.51

Windows NT 4.0

Windows ME/Windows 2000 (Sadly, Im not sure if it is possible to upgrade from NT 3.51 to Windows ME so we would have to upgrade first to Windows 2000. If I have to go to Windows 2000, I am hoping that Windows 2000 is compatible with all future servers)

Windows XP (I really hope avoid having to reach this)

Windows Vista (I should NEVER reach this point)

If for some ODD reason, I have to upgrade past Vista, Ill take a step further as "bonus trial" and switch to a Linux distribution with Samba support. Again, I should NEVER even pass 2000 or at most XP)

- The procedure would go:

1: Install first server

2: Configure first server/DC/AD/etc,

3: Make a color scheme change on server to see if it passes thru upgrades

4: Make one domain admin account and make one domain user account

5: Install first client

6: Join client to domain using domain admin account

7: Logon using domain user

8: Leave/modify a file on the domain user's desktop to see if it passes thru

9: Upgrade to next server

10: Configure any changes that are absolutely needed

11: Apply fixes needed on server so oldest client can log on

12: Logon with domain user

13: If impossible to logon, upgrade client

14: Repeat from 9

For now, that is the idea. Am I on the right track?

I do need some points though as I've never done anything like this and AD is new to me as well.

What things am I missing that I should take in consideration?

Is my upgrade path correct? Maybe I'm missing that some arch are not compatible or not available

What are the minimum domain services I should have? As far as I know, barebones I have to have the PDC emulator, RID master, infrastructure master, schema master, and domain naming master. Once I hit Windows 2000, I think I should also enable a DHCP and DNS servers.

Not only will this take a while, but I also have to see how I can get and install all these operating systems!

there is no direct upgrade for windows server until windows server 2008 to 2012.

 

there is no direct upgrade for dos to the windows nt platform (windows 2000, windows xp, windows 7, windows 8, windows 10). 

 

I wish you the best of luck, but being that there are no direct upgrades you are pretty much on your own.

"should never be used in a real life scenario."

 

I don't know about you, but this is a real life scenario. 100% chance that there is a company out there somewhere that upgraded their server from 3.1 all the way up to 2012 R2, just not in 1 day, but a couple of years. This is a real life scenario, just in turbo speed.

  On 29/03/2015 at 20:18, sc302 said:

there is no direct upgrade for windows server until windows server 2008 to 2012.

 

there is no direct upgrade for dos to the windows nt platform (windows 2000, windows xp, windows 7, windows 8, windows 10). 

 

I wish you the best of luck, but being that there are no direct upgrades you are pretty much on your own.

I thought the same thing but I saw this article: http://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/298107 and I thought it applied.

Does that article only apply to terminal services?

  On 29/03/2015 at 20:37, Studio384 said:

"should never be used in a real life scenario."

 

I don't know about you, but this is a real life scenario. 100% chance that there is a company out there somewhere that upgraded their server from 3.1 all the way up to 2012 R2, just not in 1 day, but a couple of years. This is a real life scenario, just in turbo speed.

In a real life scenario, I think most companies in the situation you stated, would go from NT to a clean Windows Server install...
  On 29/03/2015 at 20:37, Studio384 said:

I don't know about you, but this is a real life scenario. 100% chance that there is a company out there somewhere that upgraded their server from 3.1 all the way up to 2012 R2, just not in 1 day, but a couple of years. This is a real life scenario, just in turbo speed.

In a real life scenario, I don't see 2012R2 running on a machine that's approximately 20 years old from the Windows for Workgroups 3.1 era, where the minimum requirements were what, a 386SX with 4MB memory?  Think NT 3.1 was an SX with 12MB? That's not a "couple of years" worth of upgrades, that's a couple of decades.

  On 29/03/2015 at 21:54, opo said:

I thought the same thing but I saw this article: http://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/298107 and I thought it applied. Does that article only apply to terminal services?In a real life scenario, I think most companies in the situation you stated, would go from NT to a clean Windows Server install...

The article states you have to perform a full install if the os doesn't support upgrade. I don't remember any server os having the ability to upgrade..god knows I have tried.

I'd just start at Windows 2000 - I did an NT4 to AD migration every few months at my old job years back, you just migrate objects (build a new forest\setup a trust\move objects to new forest).

 

It isn't very exciting lol, I don't miss LAN\User Manager, or batch login scripts.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
  On 29/03/2015 at 22:02, Max Norris said:

In a real life scenario, I don't see 2012R2 running on a machine that's approximately 20 years old from the Windows for Workgroups 3.1 era, where the minimum requirements were what, a 386SX with 4MB memory?  Think NT 3.1 was an SX with 12MB? That's not a "couple of years" worth of upgrades, that's a couple of decades.

 

Idea is this company like Bank of America (just an example here) probably had a 1994 era domain controller on a dual core 486 with no active director. Upgraded to NT 4.0 in 1998 merged with a smaller bank in 2000 with Windows 2000 with their own ad. Upgraded to 2003 with forests and bought another company with another 2003 forest with a 2000 era AD ... etc.

 

Long story have a freaking huge global catalog. No biggie

  • 2 months later...

LOL! This was a stupid idea. You do realise that you usually migrate to new servers, than upgrade an existing one. 

Not once have I ever ran an in place upgrade on a domain controller, always built new servers and promoted them to DCs, let replication happen, move FSMO roles, rah rah, decommission old boxes. 

Edited by Jared-
  On 29/03/2015 at 20:37, Studio384 said:

"should never be used in a real life scenario."

 

I don't know about you, but this is a real life scenario. 100% chance that there is a company out there somewhere that upgraded their server from 3.1 all the way up to 2012 R2, just not in 1 day, but a couple of years. This is a real life scenario, just in turbo speed.

 

No, it's not... 20 year old hardware doesn't run Server 2012 R2. AD didn't exist till Server 2000.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Someone wrote a script to block 'brainrot' content online using an $8 smart plug by Usama Jawad Original image via Neil Chen Many people use smart plugs nowadays due to the various advantages they offer, including automation, integration with mobile software, increased home security, better energy efficiency, and compatibility with other smart products. However, a smart plug customer has gone a step further by enhancing their hardware in a way that it blocks them from viewing "brainrot" content online, or any website, for that matter. As seen in a popular thread over on Hacker News, a person known as "NWChen" has written a script that connects to the $8 Kasa Smart Wi-Fi Plug Mini and utilizes it to restrict access to websites of your choice. In essence, this plug then acts as a physical switch that you can toggle to visit certain websites. NWChen's main motivation behind this initiative was to avoid brainrot, with examples listed as X (formerly known as Twitter), Instagram, YouTube, and Reddit in their blog post. In terms of technical functionality, the smart plug connects to Wi-Fi (obviously) and hosts a physical switch that can be used to turn it on and off. NWChen's script connects to the smart plug via an API and then polls its state. If it's on, websites of your choice get restricted and you can't open them anymore, until you physically get up and turn off the plug, or remove the website from you blocklist. NWChen has recommended plugging in the hardware far away from you so there is sufficient resistance in turning off the plug. In the thread, many have praised this invention, believing that the nature of this mechanism provides enough hurdles where you'd rather just not visit the problematic websites anymore. However, some have noted that "those without self control cannot be trusted if they hold the switch". Some have also highlighted a problem where a user can simply stop the script's execution without much friction. Overall, it's a fairly interesting setup, even if it's fairly rudimentary in nature. Configuring this physical block with a Kasa smart plug is fairly easy. You can simply download the script from the laptop-brick GitHub project here, install it, get the IP address of your smart plug, and then use it when you're executing the script. You can modify the blocklist using a dedicated file present inside the GitHub project.
    • We'll probably mirror the EU rule, we've done that in many other areas, but if we don't, well we can add this as another reason why Brexit shouldn't have happened. Personally, if I started to get ads in WhatsApp, that would be a big incentive for me to want to switch to an alternative, and I doubt it will be difficult for me to get my contacts to change as well.
    • It reminds me of fossil fuels, as they try to push the price up and renewable energy continues to get better and cheaper, it's putting the squeeze on the fossil fuel industry. In this case, bringing jobs back to modern countries with higher wages would be a big incentive for corporations to remove humans from the workforce and replace them with AI and robotics, and the funny thing is about that, consumers will demand it because they want things cheaper not more expensive, also corporations will be forced to do it if they want to survive against others that go that route. At the end of the day, they didn't pick cheap labour because they wanted to do so, they did so because competition forced companies to do so, bringing jobs back to western countries would make these companies less competitive on the world stage, unless they use a lot more AI and robotics to remove a lot of humans from the workforce. With that said, bringing jobs back to more stable regions and using AI and robotics does have the benefit of reducing the risk of political trade wars and tariffs, but let's forget this idea of jobs coming back home to higher paying wages, that idea is dead in the water with the advancement of AI and robotics, and with humans, it would only end up making a lot more things more expensive.
    • Slave, assistant, companion? I think that line will blur a lot as robotics become more human like that, it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of us see them as a friend or even more.
    • It's all about flexibility, we've designed a world around humans, so having robots that can work in human like environments with the same flexibility we have, offers a lot of advantages in many areas. With that said, for specific tasks, there are better ways than human like robots, but it really depends on what task you want to do. Also, we should remember, even thought we can build human like robots, they can be built so they are stronger, faster and cheaper than we can work, so even thought that likely not as fast or as cheap as automation, it's certainly a lot more flexible and far cheaper than humans.
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      654
    2. 2
      Michael Scrip
      230
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      220
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      151
    5. 5
      Xenon
      145
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!