Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
- From: "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 18:11:06 -0600
Sorry to say but your management is wrong. Printers need to use Server
Clustering and not NLB. You can Google and find Clustering Printers, but
nothing on NLB and Printers.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
"Windowsmt60" <Windowsmt60@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:220B86E9-A373-41CD-8F3B-6248EEB896F8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> As was mentioned, my management wanted to NLB the printers for redundancy,
> but at this point. I am telling them that it is not recommended, and may
> not
> be possible, but without a firm answer ro documentation it is difficult to
> convince semi-informed parties. At this point, I do not have additional
> hardware to dedicate to File and Print services. So, I am using two of the
> three DC's. For redundancy, I am leaning to having a "backup queue" for
> each
> printer on the secondary DC where jobs can be resubmitted if necessary.
> But
> if I can get true high availability, it would be better.
>
> "Greg Page" wrote:
>
>> The real question is...what do you think NLB on a DC will achieve?
>> Everything Rod said is correct...
>> --------------------
>> | Thread-Topic: NLB on a Domain Controller?
>> | thread-index: AcYiDCduDgnjzNC0SGmkqM/RVBfL+g==
>> | X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 198.234.79.215
>> | From: "=?Utf-8?B?V2luZG93c210NjA=?="
>> <Windowsmt60@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> | References: <F8918235-B202-4484-9894-C19B1A5E92B9@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <OD95kogIGHA.1728@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> | Subject: Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
>> | Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:05:02 -0800
>> | Lines: 59
>> | Message-ID: <30E5561D-C0BB-4AAE-AC15-72BA2170484F@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> | MIME-Version: 1.0
>> | Content-Type: text/plain;
>> | charset="Utf-8"
>> | Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> | X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
>> | Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
>> | Importance: normal
>> | Priority: normal
>> | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.0
>> | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.clustering
>> | NNTP-Posting-Host: TK2MSFTNGXA03.phx.gbl 10.40.2.250
>> | Path: TK2MSFTNGXA02.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGXA03.phx.gbl
>> | Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA02.phx.gbl
>> microsoft.public.windows.server.clustering:13291
>> | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.clustering
>> |
>> | Agreed. And let me affirm that the idea is theoretical at this point.
>> DHCP is
>> | not on these DCs, to clarify. I was merely giving a scenario given
>> limited
>> | server hardware availability. And I trying to avoid exactly what you
>> are
>> | saying. I have pressure to stretch the limitations on the current
>> hardware,
>> | and while my argument is that we are already using the DC's for
>> Exchange
>> GAL
>> | lookups, WINS, DNS, File and Print, (3 DC's total) and I recommend
>> moving
>> the
>> | file and print elsewhere, if pressured, I only want minimal services
>> load
>> | balanced. Anything else would be even more problematic at this point. I
>> have
>> | my doubts that I can even do this successfully, but I cannot find
>> | documentation to the contrary, therefore, I am having trouble
>> explaining
>> my
>> | reluctance to trying it other than possible user downtime if the
>> scenario
>> | fails.
>> |
>> | So while the point is conceded through sheer personal experience, the
>> | question still stands, can it be done and if not, is there
>> documentation
>> to
>> | at the very least recommend that NLB not be used on a DC? I need to be
>> armed
>> | in order to leverage this argument or I need to know that I could
>> succeed
>> in
>> | order to drop the argument. Thanks.
>> |
>> | "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" wrote:
>> |
>> | > Hmm NLB on a DC. That would fall under too much on a DC! You know
>> that
>> every
>> | > DC would have to have the same IP and MAC for this to work. How would
>> the
>> | > DC's replicate between themselves? Even with a second NIC, this is a
>> little
>> | > tricky, with DNS and such, plus client access, Kerberos, etc.
>> | >
>> | > I would not advice it. File, DHCP, and Print are made for Server
>> Clustering.
>> | > DHCP is not recommended on a DC due to security concerns. Sounds like
>> you
>> | > might get too many eggs in your DC's basket!
>> | >
>> | > Good luck!
>> | >
>> | > Cheers,
>> | >
>> | > Rod
>> | >
>> | > MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
>> | > http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
>> | > http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
>> | > http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
>> | >
>> | > "Windowsmt60" <Windowsmt60@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>> message
>> | > news:F8918235-B202-4484-9894-C19B1A5E92B9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> | > > Can I use port filtering to selectively load balance services on a
>> DC?
>> | > > Specifically, I would like to support high availability for
>> services
>> such
>> | > > as
>> | > > file and print that are currently handled by my DCs without
>> affecting
>> | > > operation of my authentication, DNS, and WINS and DHCP. If I filter
>> on
>> | > > port
>> | > > 9100 would I not be able to only accept printing on the cluster MAC
>> and
>> | > > not
>> | > > affect performance of the other services with Multicast enabled?
>> | > >
>> | > > Thanks,
>> | > >
>> | > > Mike
>> | >
>> | >
>> | >
>> |
>>
>>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
- From: Greg Page
- Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
- References:
- Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
- From: Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]
- Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
- From: Greg Page
- Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
- From: Windowsmt60
- Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
- Prev by Date: Re: Can't access the SAN drives
- Next by Date: RE: Just a question
- Previous by thread: Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
- Next by thread: Re: NLB on a Domain Controller?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
