Windows Network Services Proposal – Identify
Each student will create a detailed, organized, unified technical solution given the scenario described below. The submission will be in a written format, with at least one diagram, and may include additional diagrams, charts or tables. The assignment is meant for students to enhance their mastery of the material and to provide a creative and realistic way in which to apply knowledge from this course.
Opening Windows. (referred to as “OW”) has hired you as an IT consultant for their Windows network services infrastructure. OW is a new advertising firm, and they have hired staff, are established in two locations, and have a need to get their internal IT services configured. They have an IT staff, but they do not have the in-house expertise to address their current infrastructure needs.
You are required to supply OW with a solution which addresses the integration and configuration of their Active Directory updates. Cost is not a significant concern – OW wishes to implement the “right” solution to address their acquisition of a new company and its Active Directory forest which is comprised of a single domain. More specifically, OW is based out of Houston, TX and they have a Windows Server 2016 domain that is operating at the Windows Server 2016 functional level. They recently acquired Media Guru Group which is based out of Richmond, VA, which has a domain running Windows Server 2012 domain controllers.
There are several details about OW which will have an impact on your proposal:
• OW has restructured their organization they have a total of 110 employees in their Houston and Richmond sites. Each location the following departments:
• OW will have two sites, one in Houston, TX, and one in Richmond, VA.
• Executives (9 total with 5 in Houston, 4 in Richmond) – manage and run the company
• Accounts and Sales Department (30 employees with 15 in Houston and 15 in Richmond) – perform market research and maintain accounts
• Creative, Media and Production Department (49 employees in Houston) – advertising
• Human Resources and Finances (12 employees in Houston) – perform HR and financial duties
• IT (10 employees with 5 in Houston and 5 in Richmond) – manage IT for the company
• Networking equipment is already in place for both sites, which are separate Active Directory Domains.
• Security mechanisms (e.g., firewalls, intrusion detection) will be handled separately, and there is no need to describe them.
• Some departments will want their data to remain private from other departments (e.g., Finances personnel will not want Production staff to see the company’s financial details). Your team may make assumptions about how data should be shared or kept private.
• Assumptions can be made regarding any information not included here; all assumptions should be identified, however.
There are specific requirements for the assignment: The final submission should contain at least 8 pages’ worth of text written by the student (not counting title page, images, diagrams, tables, or quotations), but may be longer, not to exceed approximately 12 pages’ worth of student-supplied text. (With the required diagram, and other images, title page, etc., the final submission may end up being more than 12 pages in length.) It must be double-spaced, have 1-inch margins, and use 12-point Times New Roman or 10-point Arial/Helvetica font. A title page is required.
• At least one diagram must be included (not counted towards the minimum length described above); this could be a diagram describing Active Directory components, DHCP/DNS design, or anything else that is worth displaying graphically to enhance the reader’s understanding of the proposal. Additional diagrams, images, or tables are welcome.
• The submission must cover all of the major topics outlined in the Topics to Cover section. Each choice should be explained with technical and business reasoning. The solution should be reasonably detailed. Additional topics may be covered as desired.
• The structure of the final submission is flexible; however, it should be organized logically and represent a single, unified solution. It is likely that the format will include separate sections for each of the topics required, as well as a summary.
• At least two non-textbook, non-LabSim, non-Wikipedia reference is required; preferably, this would be a “best practice” guide or sOWlar content from Microsoft or an experienced provider of Microsoft solutions.
• Be sure to properly quote or cite any sources used. APA format is required for in-text citations and the list of works cited at the end. It is expected that you are already familiar with UMUC’s “Policy on Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism.” It is available in the Academic Policies section of the Syllabus; there are also links in the Webliography. In its simplest form, if you are using text from a source, you must cite and/or quote it. If plagiarism is found, then there will be a penalty to the grade.
Topics to Cover
Your document should cover the content presented in the course. The outline below contains recommended points to cover. You are free to add other related information.
Describe the technical and business reasons for each choice, citing other resources as appropriate. The Windows Server 2016 operating system should be used for all aspects of the solution.
The topics include:
Active Directory Infrastructure
• Describe features of Windows Server 2016 that will allow OW to integrate the newly acquired company’s domain into their existing forest.
• How will Forest Functional Levels be implemented?
• How will cross-forest trusts be implemented?
• How will replication be handled?
Active Directory Certificate Services
• Will AD Certificate Services used in both domains need to be modified?
Active Directory Rights Management Services
• What use of AD Rights Management Services can be implemented?
Active Directory Federation Services
• AD Federation Services
• What forest/domain model should Fixing Windows LLC implement? What is the domain name?
• Where should the domain controllers be placed? Should RODC be part of the consideration?
• FSMO Roles placement
• Plan for AD backup and recovery
• Is Group Policy needed?
• What settings might be considered via Group Policy?
Other Windows 2016 Server features:
• Will the WEB APPLICATION PROXY (WAP) be utilized?
This paper will dissect the triumphs and disappointments of the biggest show on the security of exchange of jeopardized species. There are different issues that hinder CITES from meeting every one of its goals. Nonetheless, the Convention has and keeps on prevailing with regards to constraining exchange to ensure undermined species as it were. It is unthinkable for a show that spreads such an expansive scope of animal types to control the exchange of each and every creature, in this way the positive experimental proof exhibits that CITES is generally speaking fruitful. So as to exhibit this, I will initially investigate the posting method and the begging to be proven wrong nearness of logical objectiveness, which impacts its appropriateness and setting. Next, the structure of the Convention will be examined with respect to how it aides and prevents usage. Further, the issues and reactions in regards to CITES' down to earth implementation will be evaluated. In the wake of having confirmed that the benefits of the Convention itself exceed the drawbacks, the exploration question will be examined through the contextual analysis of elephants. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora went into power on the first July 1975. It focusses on managing global exchange of specific types of creatures and plants to guarantee that their endurance isn't compromised. As of now, CITES incorporates upwards of 35,000 species. Because of the natural life exchange showcase being worth billions of pounds and including a huge number of animal varieties, controlling it is crucial. Refers to centers explicitly around ensuring species that are being abused, because of the enormous measure of exchange. Since levels of abuse for every specie vary, CITES has different degrees of security. In spite of the fact that this bargain is multilateral and subsequently has lawfully restricting power, it just gives a structure inside which each Party ought to embrace their very own household enactment. This outlines the need of solid global participation to accomplish the point of the Convention. Because of interest being deliberate, the way that such huge numbers of nations have joined shows a readiness to work together in endeavors to spare imperiled species. The fair philosophical methodology likewise accommodates why the Convention has gotten so a lot of regard and now incorporates 183 Parties. Refers to is one of the worldwide natural settlements that has been most broadly embraced and accomplished extraordinary victories. The incomparable basic leadership assortment of CITES is the Conference of Parties. The CoP is comprised of agents of each Party in the Convention, who meet each a few years to survey the advancement of the present postings, just as think about whether new species should be included or moved under an alternate Appendix. The other fundamental body of the Convention is the Secretariat, which is regulated by the United Nations Environment Program. This position incorporates an organizing and warning job, just as going about as a help system in the execution procedure. 2. The Listings under CITES: a. Appendixes Explained: Refers to sets up three Appendices into which species can be recorded, contingent upon the measure of security required. Reference section I "include[s] all species compromised with annihilation which are or might be influenced in terms of professional career," accordingly must be exchanged "uncommon conditions." There is a prohibition on Appendix I species except if either an import or fare license is conceded. Informative supplement II incorporates species that "may become [threatened with extinction] except if exchange examples of such species is dependent upon exacting guideline." Parties are required to screen and limit exchange, except if it is shown through logical proof that it is allowed. Finally, the least directed is Appendix III which incorporates "all species which any Party recognizes as being dependent upon guideline inside its locale to avoid or limiting misuse" and demands CITES' support in controlling exchange. Exchange under Appendix III must be observed, yet not confined. The postings under the Appendices are not fixed. Supplement I and II can be corrected by a 66% lion's share vote of the Parties present, while Appendix III can be singularly changed. Choices, including alterations, are embraced by the CoP and get authoritative following 90 days without approval. The strengthening given to the Parties, through the type of designated law-production, can be seen as concerning. It empowers them to take noteworthy choices without being checked by any prevalent position. It additionally diminishes the weight on each Party in casting a ballot, as they realize that their one vote won't be the determinant of the choice, which may bring about careless choices. This confirmations the requirement for well-contemplated criteria, since they are not given by CITES, and are at the zenith of the basic leadership process. b. Disappointment of Bern Criteria: The principal endeavor to give a far reaching set of rules was at the Bern Conference of Parties in 1976. The posting criteria built up norms that must be considered for species in Appendices I and II. It was an endeavor to utilize natural proof when deciding, nonetheless, the significance of this information depended to a great extent on its accessibility. This was a positive move away from the dubious language of the Convention, yet, it was ambiguous and took into account political perspectives to impact choices. Also, it made it practically unimaginable for species in Appendix I to be downsized to Appendix II, which undermined the unmistakable quality of Appendix I. The Bern Criteria were at last progressively worried about securing untamed life, as opposed to satisfying the point of the Convention, which is to manage exchange. The Bern rules didn't triumph in giving solid benchmarks to pursue. They essentially indicated out issues consider during the basic leadership process, taking into consideration wide elucidation by the Parties. At the Kyoto CoP, it was built up that the absence of sound rules destabilized CITES. It was clear that an increasingly logical methodology was required. This would move towards constraining political choices and consequently bring about right choices being taken, just as upgrade the nearness of the Rule of Law. c. The Fort Lauderdale CoP: At the Ninth CoP, changes were made to the Bern rules. Right off the bat, and seemingly in particular, logical quantitative rules were presented through the formation of the Fort Lauderdale Criteria. Also, there was a move in qualities to think about when deciding the posting of species from being an exchange status to a natural status. Moreover, the CoP embraced down-posting species that never again require the stringent guidelines of the index they were in, just as allowed split-posting, implying that two distinct populaces of similar species could be in various supplements. I. Post Lauderdale Criteria Explained: The rules, overhauled at the thirteenth CoP in 2004, include four expansive organic criteria for evaluating whether an animal groups ought to be remembered for Appendix I. They express that one must have respect to the size and vacillations of the populace size, variances in the zone of dissemination and nature of the living space of the species. For Appendix II to be met, it either should be realized that guideline of exchange is important to "maintain a strategic distance from it getting qualified for consideration in Appendix I sooner rather than later" or "to guarantee that the collect of examples from the wild isn't lessening the wild populace." At first occasion, the criteria seem unclear and don't appear to give a lot of extra an incentive to the current rules. Nonetheless, this is on the grounds that the definitions given by the CoP are what contain the quantitative criteria. For example, reference to the 'not so distant future' is given a numerical estimation of being over five years, however under ten years. In this manner, these exact norms tight the extent of the rules, just as acquaint a progressively logical methodology with the posting system. ii. Objectivity of the FLC: Regardless of whether the FLC are effective in killing political contribution from posting choices is hostile. The quantifiable terms of the criteria show an endeavor to settle on posting choices as experimentally objective as could reasonably be expected. The obviously characterized terms mean to limit watchfulness during the basic leadership process. In any case, the CoP recognizes that species all unfathomably vary from one another and are affected by case-explicit interests. This is delineated by their permission that the figures are only approximations and must be deciphered during their application, which brings about further issues of attentiveness emerging from the criteria. The FLC don't make simply target rules for basic leadership. In any case, that is for all intents and purposes unimaginable and unreasonable. Along these lines, the endeavor towards expanded objectivity can be seen as an achievement in itself. The way that the criteria advance the utilization of logical language in CoP discourses delineates this accomplishment. It makes the impetus to state contentions utilizing an unbiased jargon, which empowers progressively quiet discussions between Parties. This outcomes in progressively gainful CoP, as individuals are more probable and ready to arrive at productive trade offs. Moreover, the decreasing of contentions additionally lessens the probability that Parties will enter reservations, or even leave the Convention. Organic proof gives conceivable avocations to why certain choices are being taken, which considers residential sponsorship on dubious themes. In spite of the fact that the logical criteria itself will be unable to legitimately make target basic leadership, the way that it supports logical talk at the CoP is a backhanded achievement. Political perspectives and inspirations can never be completely barred, as choices taken by individuals unavoidably include abstract feelings and can never be really fair-minded. In any case, presenting unbiased language>GET ANSWER