Is this a bad way to configure a WINS or DNS server ?

[guod]

Our 2000 domain has two DNS servers.

In server1's TCP/IP settings, server1 is listed as the primary DNS server, and server2 is listed as the secondary server.

Server2 lists server2 as it's primary, and server1 as the secondary.

I'm not talking forwarding (although that is enabled), and server2 has a secondary zone for the domain. The zone is an active directory enabled zone.

One of our staff says a DNS server should ONLY list itself in its TCP/IP settings, while most of us say the way things are is correct for failover conditions.

Does anyone have any documented info saying one or the other configuration is correct ?

TIA

 

[ChrisAC]

It really doesn't matter as long as DNS works. Generally you want two DNS servers listed so the way you have it is just fine. If each server has itself listed then it will check its own DNS server first and providing that its server is up then it shouldn't have to query the other one.

Chris.


**********************
Chris Andrew, CCNA, CCSA
chris@iproute.co.uk
**********************

 

[tylan]

I'd think it doen't matter as long as your stuff is working! MS KB Q300202 Says "Note that Windows 2000-based DNS severs should point to themselves for DNS. If this server needs to resolve names from its Internet service provider (ISP), you should configure a forwarder."

I wasn't able to find anything specific on two DNS servers. I'd say that if the replication & zone transfers are working all-happy-like you shouldn't need the TCP/IP stack to have anything other than itself listed. I'd think you want Server A to query its DNS Server, then once the record can't be found let the DNS Server forward the request to Server B. Don't have the IP stack cut the local DNS server out of the loop.

As iproute said "It really doesn't matter as long as DNS works.

 

[devastator]

I have read and have set up that each DNS Server should only point to itself in the TCP/IP settings on each Server. If you search Tek-Tips you will find what i am talking about.

You can assign the workstations both DNS servers for resolution.


That is what i have set up just based on what i have read. Don't konw for sure if there is a right way or wrong way, but if it works like stated above, i guess that is all anyone can ask.


Dev

 

[ChrisAC]

The DNS resolver on a DNS server is a client like any other client on the network. Just because the machine has a DNS server running on it does not mean that the resolver should be configured any differently. The DNS settings within the TCP/IP part of the network configuration have nothing to do with the DNS server than runs on the box. One is a server and one is a client resolver so you would still put two DNS servers in the TCP/IP settings. What if that machine was also being used as a proxy server or mail server and the DNS process crashed out? If you only had itself configured for DNS then your other services would cease to work correctly (no resolution of websites/MX records).

Chris.


**********************
Chris Andrew, CCNA, CCSA
chris@iproute.co.uk
**********************

 

[devastator]

Well maybe that was WINS then that on a WINS Server was suppose to only point to itself and not any other WINS server. I know I read that many times for either WINS or DNS. Since we updated to Windows 2003 and stopped using WINS maybe that is where i became confused and setup our DNS Servers with only their IP addresses.
If no to both then there are a million techs out there that are incorrect.


Dev

 

[guod]

Thanks to all.

Today a colleague showed me a MS best practces document that says WINS servers should ONLY look at themselves, but it doesn't say anything about DNS servers

 

[devastator]

This was taken off of Microsoft Web Site.

Creating the Secondary Server


--Setting the Secondary DNS Client to Query Itself


The first critical step in configuring a secondary DNS server is to set the DNS client in the TCP/IP stack to use the DNS server's own IP address. Put another way, you must set this server's operating system to use the DNS server that it hosts as its own DNS server. The reason is simple: a secondary DNS server is a backup machine that is promoted if the primary server fails. Therefore its network stack should rely on its own server rather than a DNS server that could have failed at a time when the secondary DNS server is called on to support network clients. This applies even if this is an internal DNS server that you plan to use as the preferred DNS server for some clients, a decision you might make to load balance DNS requests.

 

[devastator]

Though this link says for ISP's that statement above applies to what we are using DNS for which is internal and for load balancing.

http://www.microsoft.com/serviceproviders/whitepapers/isp_dns_config.asp

 

[ChrisAC]

Therefore its network stack should rely on its own server rather than a DNS server that could have failed at a time when the secondary DNS server is called on to support network clients."

The secondary server is only queried when the primary can't be reached anyway. So, if your primary is the server itself then that would mean that its own DNS server would have to be down before it queried another server. Therefore you have two options:

1. Don't use a secondary and so DNS stops working when your DNS server fails.

2. Have a secondary and so DNS continues to work.

It's a bit of a no brainer isn't it!

Chris.


**********************
Chris Andrew, CCNA, CCSA
chris@iproute.co.uk
**********************

 

[devastator]

Well duh, we have a Secondary server, but the question is do you put both DNS Servers IP's in the TCP/IP stack on the Primary and Secondary DNS Servers? So on the Primary servers TCP/IP setting you list its ip and the secondary's IP, and on the Secondary list the Primary and the Secondary IP.

Microsoft says no.

Just trying understand myself @ss clown!!!

 

[guod]

What about in a non-ISP environment ?

Our DNS servers are also out 2000 Domain controllers

 

[ChrisAC]

It really doesn't matter which way around you list them as the chance of DNS failure is the same no matter which one you select as primary and which one as secondary. If you have a master server and a slave then generally I would list the master first. It's really down to personnal preference more than a genuine technical reason providing that both servers are on the same network doing the same job. It's a trivial matter which one is primary and which one is secondary as long as DNS works.

Chris.


**********************
Chris Andrew, CCNA, CCSA
chris@iproute.co.uk
**********************