Are are now realizing that our original tree design may not be optimal.
This is how our tree is laid out currently:

- Tree Root
- O container (school abc)
- OU container
- objects
- O container (school def)
- OU container
- objects
- O container (school ghi)
- OU container
- objects

Ideally we should have laid it out like this:

- Tree Root
- O container
- OU container (school abc)
- OU container
- objects
- OU container (school def)
- OU container
- objects
- OU container (school ghi)
- OU container
- objects


My question is, is it still possible to add an O container at the root of
the tree and move everything else inside this O container? I can see one
problem here and that is O containers cannot exist beneath other O
containers. Is there a way around this? I one rason we are looking into
this now is to resolve this issue which I am pasting from my other thread:

"I am trying to setup contextless login in our tree which has an O
container for each school under the tree root; there will be 13 containers
in all. I was thinking I'd put each container in the Context Search Scope
list (Client Properties, LDAP Contextless Login tab, select the tree, then
Properties...) so I could specify which container to search first but I am
only permitted to put 10 entries in here. I could just not use the
Context Search Scope but then users towards the bottom of the tree will
take longer to find, correct?

Is there a better way to set this up so that users at their local site
don't have to wait long for their object to be found?"

Any ideas?