Re: Why adding secondary IP to NIC of DNS servers failed ?

Hi Greg Lindsay

I thought netmask ordering only affected how DNS servers answer queries.
Can it also affect the client's preferred DNS settings?

well according to my knowledge the option "netmask ordering" make sure that
DNS answers queries to a client in the same subnet as that client, and with
multiple ipaddress and with Round and robin enabled as default there's the
possibility of the server gives the answer to the wrong Ipaddress? If I
misunderstood you please feel free to let me know, at this point I'm already
a little bit confused if this affects only the subnet mask or also the
Ipaddress, I need to review this again to make sure, anyway, because the
netmask ordering takes over the Round and robin option I don't think that if
he select this option won't be any problem.

Hi Marlon Brown
-Did you check if the DNS server is listning on both IPAddress?
-If I understand you correctly your app Servers are on 1.x.x.x correct?
-If yes this means that you've a router/fw between both subnets to resove
the 200.x.x.x address?
-What happens when you try to ping the 200.x.x.x address, can you get an
reply?
-Is the router blocking the port port 53 TCP/UDP?




--
I hope that the information above helps you

Good Luck
Jorge Silva
MCSA
Systems Administrator

"Marlon Brown" <MarlonBrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OHWhUkZtGHA.3912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From a member server MyAppserver which experienced the DNS resolution
issues after DNS01 and DNS02 got the additional IP 1.x.x.x added to the
NIC:

Advanved TCP/IP Settings

DNS Server addresses
200.1.1.2 (note it is pointing to the original DNS IP address)
200.1.1.1


As you can see the member servers were not touched. All I did was adding
the 1.x.x.x. IPs to the TCP/IP properties on the respective DNS Servers
and let the new IP's ready for people to use them if they wanted, while
letting the original 200.x.x.x IP's coexist for few days.




"Jorge Silva" <jorgesilva_pt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23i6uMzYtGHA.1216@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi

I hope that you don't mind for me to step in.

I just want to add something:
Check if you have under the dns properties:
netmask ordering selected on advanced tab, and under the interfaces tab
if you have listen for both ipaddress.

--
I hope that the information above helps you

Good Luck
Jorge Silva
MCSA
Systems Administrator

"Greg Lindsay [MSFT]" <greg.lindsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OwOQYWYtGHA.1216@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You mean it is input manually with different subnets for DNS and
IP/gateway? When you correct it, does it stay corrected, or return to
the previous values?

I've not heard of this sort of problem before, but perhaps someone else
has. If it's happening on more than one machine, I still think it might
be related to the new DHCP server test. Is it possible that someone
else was messing with the settings?

--
Greg Lindsay [MSFT]
greg.lindsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.

"Marlon Brown" <MarlonBrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:O3crZ5XtGHA.4140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I know, but in this case, both IP and DNS information has been input
manually. Any idea what could have caused this ?


"Greg Lindsay [MSFT]" <greg.lindsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eVDzAkPtGHA.4748@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Configuration of the TCP/IP settings for IP address and DNS are
independent. You can have a static IP address, but still select
"Obtain DNS server address automatically", and vice-versa.

Make sure you have both set to static (and have the correct addresses)
if you aren't using DHCP. Later when you switch to DHCP, make sure to
switch both again.

I hope this helps!

--
Greg Lindsay [MSFT]
greg.lindsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.

"Marlon Brown" <MarlonBrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:umpOAKPtGHA.4140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On MyApplicationServer on the network 1.0.0.0, here is the IP address
configuration:
The servers which freaked out are all under static IP address
configuration. It is true folks are testing a new DHCP server on
given networks, but since our servers point to static IP address, I
think that is unrelated.


DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 1.0.0.200
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 1.0.0.254
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 200.1.1.2 (note it is pointing to
the original DNS IP address)
200.1.1.1
Primary WINS Server . . . . . Wrong IP ( I don't think this is
related to the DNS issue, but I noticed that WINS IP existing there
is invalid)
Secondary WINS Server . . . Wrong IP







"Greg Lindsay [MSFT]" <greg.lindsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:u4%23nqnOtGHA.4968@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Are the people on other networks using a different DHCP server?

What is the order of the preferred DNS servers being sent to clients
on the 200.1.1.x network?

--
Greg Lindsay [MSFT]
greg.lindsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.

"Marlon Brown" <MarlonBrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:ea3NWiLtGHA.1888@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is the situation:

DNS-ADI-WINS1 = IP=200.1.1.1
DNS-ADI-WINS2 = IP=200.1.1.2

I will have to replace DNS-ADI-WINS1 IP addresses by IP=1.0.0.1 and
1.0.0.2 respectively.
What I did:

I added the IP addresses to the NIC of the DNS servers. That way
addresses 200.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1 coexist. I did that so people could
start updating firewall rules, static member server IP addresses,
DHCP scope to point to the new DNS IP addresses 10.0.0.x. At
scheduled date I would remove the 200.1.1.1 addresses from the NIC
of the respective DNS-ADI-WINS servers.

Problem:
After adding the secondary 1.x.x.x IP addresses to the DNS servers
TCP/IP properties, people with servers on the specific network
200.1.1.x experienced problems with server resolution. All servers
on 200.1.1.1 was unable to successfully return nslookup queries and
locate DNS resources.
Can someone explain what could be causing this ? Servers on other
networks performed OK, only the ones on the same network than the
DNS servers


















.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Help with initial small org AD setup convention when using DMZ network
    ... Consider using Dynamic DNS internally (aka Active Directory Integrated ... > firewall which then connects the public IP dmz network to a private IP ... > domain name for such subnets based on the nearest airport code, ... > servers to serve acme.com names for external users. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory)
  • Re: Dynamic DNS, DNS Records & Scavenging
    ... There are two DHCP ... Both the servers are set to update A and PTR records for clients. ... DNS however this doesn't seem to be the case. ... DNSUpdateProxy and when i did this i saw my test laptop register its ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.dns)
  • Help with initial small org AD setup convention when using DMZ network
    ... firewall which then connects the public IP dmz network to a private IP ... domain name for such subnets based on the nearest airport code, ... Yahoo to manage my externally-visible DNS names on the acme.com domain. ... and servers that use this domain, ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory)
  • Re: network has gone down again, and I cannot figure out why
    ... search dns: dns.asm.bellsouth.net ... try against the secondary DNS server address. ... up DHCP on this end and now I can email. ... DHCP just configures your side of the network with the data that the ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: networking private and public hosts questions
    ... DHCP isn't going to "help". ... you need to run NAT. ... Move all the Servers to the private side of the Firewall and start ... Controllers must point to themselves in thier DNS Setting and the ISP's DNS ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.networking)
Loading