Organizations might sometimes require their ADT is designed to contain more than one forest.
There are several reasons why one ideas forest might not be sufficient.
Let's list all of these and requirements.
The first one is security isolation requirements.
If an organization requires administrative isolation between two or more parts of the organization it
must deploy multiple ADT domains.
Sorry forests government defense contractors and other organizations for whom the isolation of security
is a requirement often deployed separately.
It is forests in Windows Server 2016 and higher ed it is includes a new feature called privileged access
management or Pam which uses a separate best in forest to isolate privileged accounts in order to protect
against credential theft techniques.
The next reason is incompatible schema requirements.
Some organizations might require multiple forests because they require incompatible schemas or incompatible
scheme change processes.
All domains in a forest share or the schema.
The next reason is multinational requirements.
Some countries or regions have strict regulations regarding the ownership or management of enterprises
within the country or region.
Having a separate entity as forest might provide the administrative isolation that legislation requires.
The next requirement is extra net security requirements.
Some organizations deploy several servers in a perimeter network.
These servers might need 80 days to authenticate user accounts or they might use ADT s to enforce policies
on the servers in the perimeter network to ensure that the extra net ADT s is as secure as possible.
Organization often configure a separate edit as forest in the perimeter network.
Another requirement is business merger or divestiture requirements.
Business mergers are among the most common reasons why organizations have multiple ideas domains.
When organizations merge or one organization purchases in other they must evaluate the necessity of
merging their ADT as forests merging ADT as forests provides benefits related to simplified collaboration
and administration.
However even the two different groups in their organizations are to be managed separately.
And if there is little need for collaboration the expanse of merging two forests might not be worth
it.
In particular if there is a plan to sell one part of the company retaining the two organizations as
separate forests is preferable as a best practice.
Choose the simplest design that achieves the required goal.
It is less expensive to implement and more straightforward to administer.