Azure Active Directory Domain Services

>>61722243
Even if you could, why would you ever want to do this? If your internet goes down you're fucked.

>>61722276

Due to the lack of local servers at my locations, most of the data and services I'm working with are cloud based anyways.

Assuming cached credentials work for login, I don't see there being much difference in losing internet and losing FS/Email/Web app access.

>>61722290

To rephrase - If the internet goes down I lose all critical services anyways except for logging in to a system so I'm not seeing the downside.

>>61722301
>To rephrase - If the internet goes down I lose all critical services anyways except for logging in to a system so I'm not seeing the downside.
So you're not doing things like 802.1X or WPA Enterprise?

And if you're not doing this and everything is in the cloud why do you even have endpoints which need management instead of VDI?

>>61722345

Honestly, these are good questions but I'm still not thinking of a decent solution to my problems.

~20 sites with 20-30 users per site all of which function primarily on BYOD.

> So you're not doing things like 802.1X or WPA Enterprise?

Nope. Basically nothing happening.

>why do you even have endpoints which need management instead of VDI?

Cheap client likes the idea of BYOD due to cheaper/"free" prices. VDI for ~100 consecutive users would be a pretty intense requirement to build out for VDI no?

Never actually spec'd a VDI solution out due to always writing it off as cost prohibitive for my typically small clients.

>>61722497

Client is now becoming (rightly) concerned about the risk attaching a few hundred ramdom systems to their data provides and wants to place some hard requirements to attach to cloud filesystems.

>>61722497
>~20 sites with 20-30 users per site all of which function primarily on BYOD.
Then why would you even be managing them if it is BYOD? Management and BYOD generally arent two terms which go together.

>Cheap client likes the idea of BYOD due to cheaper/"free" prices.
Jews. They wont when Microsoft/Adobe/whoever inevitably ends up auditing them and management realizes that end users are incapable of managing licensing. Or any of the countless other problems which come with end users taking over IT roles.

>Never actually spec'd a VDI solution out due to always writing it off as cost prohibitive for my typically small clients.
How much would be in their cost range?

>>61722243
can someone explain to me real short and simple like what the fuck "active domain" even is?
Is it basically a friendly botnet? why do you use it?

>>61722553

>why would you even be managing them

All of these endpoints require a bit of software to connect to cloud storage, and then AV to keep it "safe". currently it's just installed once, then forgotten about.

This is something I want to change if I can possibly do it. I should probably say fuck it and treat it they're budgeting for - a total joke.

>How much would be in their cost range?

A non-managed non POE switch was purchased manually by the CTO on amazon instead of the managed POE switch I put on a quote. That's the level of Jew we're talking about.

>>61722626
>Is it basically a friendly botnet? why do you use it?
Yes. To do botnet things.

>>61722634
I would just say setup a remote desktop services box and then setup remoteapps on their endpoints, but clearly they are too jewy to do even this.

>>61722243

It should work. If your company can afford it the it offers alot of convenience for IT as well as your regular staff.

So long as your physical machines can contact your "virtual DC" in azure you'll be fine.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/active-directory/active-directory-azureadjoin-user-upgrade

>>61722795

I was able to join a system to azure AD in this way earlier today. I need to spin up AD DS to test the rest. Before I wasted my time I was interested in others experiences doing this.