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

    • What annoys me is the people that try to buy a higher end product, and then low ball you, and say but I don't need that function, all I need is to use it for video out so I don't feel like paying higher price.   I had a person that was trying to buy RTX 3080 from me for $100 and his excuse was, well I won't be playing games on it, I just need four monitor outout. Or someone was trying to buy 2TB Gen5 M.2 for $50, well I don't need the speed, is just for basic storage. Or i was offered $80 for 20TB hard drive, that person said well, right now I only about 7TB, so rest won't be in use Just some examples in last month or two...   The guy with the 3080, I replied to with something like go to Chevy dealer and offer them $15K for that brand new corvette and tell them that you you only need to drive to work, so you don't need to go fast.   There a lot of low ballers that try to take advantage.
    • Not in Syracuse, NY. They're about to break ground! https://www.syracuse.com/micro...on-and-other-tech-jobs.html
    • Here in Finland we have lots of rural areas with narrow roads, one of the highest taxes in the world (cars are taxed way above EU standards) and fuel is quite expensive. Yet we educate our drivers to drive responsibly and safely in all areas, and our people respect each others rights and freedom to move around safely. Which is why we have even small children under 10 years old walking and cycling alone to schools in the streets, even in big cities. Safety is about being responsible and about respecting others. And I would hate to see AI (or anyone else) destroy our way of life. There are and always will be outliers, accidents happen and machines break. I dont't want to see people relying on AI to do things like driving for them. I want people to think and react to the world around them themselves, and being responsible instead of them browsing TikTok or whatever instead of looking out the window, and then saying that "It wasn't me, it was the car". Already people walk around town with their eyes glued to a screen – I don't want people driving around the same way.
    • And I should hope none will. I don't want to walk ouside to have some randome AI drive over me and mine. Not that I want a person to do it either but I want there to be an actual person who takes responsibility of their actions instead of relinquishing control to a machine. In some highways I can accept self-driving, but even then there should be some kind of dead man switch etc. that actually monitors the drivers status.
    • No thank you. I want to drive myself, and not just because I don't trust a machine or whatever – I like driving, and I like doing it with a manual car without lane guidance and all other "driver assists". I wven rarely use cruise control. I went through and paid for to have a license to that allows me to do it, and do it responsibly instead of relinquishing control to a machine. I currently drive a van for work in a city, something like 200 km/day. If we everything is automated and computers decide everything for us, the dumber people will get since they don't have to bother thinking for themselves nor do they have to take responsibility for themselves since "it wasn't me, it was the machine" will be their future defence for everything. Soon, Neowin's writers will be out of a job because AI can do it just fine and it doesn't need pay. Wikipedia – a free service with voluntary writers – just started replacing real people with AI, and had to shut it down (at least for now). Lets let ai AI and those that run it (or rather run them) the keys the the world and watch it burn because no one is able to actually do anything without some AI assistant telling them what to do (driving included). What a world!
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      POR2GAL4EVER earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Orpheus13 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Orpheus13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Orpheus13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      serfegyed earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      536
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      247
    3. 3
      +FloatingFatMan
      176
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      166
    5. 5
      Xenon
      118
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!