adamretter
asked on
ASAP - Windows 2000 Network - DNS Problem
Okay I have two Windows 2000 Servers on a network.
Server 1 - 10.0.0.134 (PDC - Running Active Directory and DNS Server).
Network Settings has 10.0.0.134 and 212.104.129.9 and 212.104.129.65 listed as DNS Servers.
DNS Server is configured as Root and has a "." zone
Server 2 - 10.0.0.130 (Member Server running IIS)
Network Settings has 10.0.0.134 and 212.104.129.9 and 212.104.129.65 listed as DNS Servers
If I got to a command prompt on Server2 and do an nslookup for mail.eclipse.co.uk. using either 212.104.129.4 or .65 DNS Servers it returns the IP address, which is Great!
However if I do a nslookup for mail.eclipse.co.uk using 10.0.0.134 DNS server then it fails and returns no result. Why is this ???
Also if i do a ping mail.eclipse.co.uk at the CMD prompt it says Unknown Host, however if I ping the IP address for mail.eclipse.co.uk (212.104.129.224) it pings fine.
Now I guess whats happening here is ping does an nslookup against the 10.0.0.134 dns server and fails and then says Unknow Host.
1)Why doesnt it then try and do an nslookup against 212.104.129.4 or then 212.104.129.65 as they are also listed as DNS servers in my Windows network settings???
2) Why doesnt the 10.0.0.134 dns server resolve the address via. one of the internet root dns servers - is it because it is setup as a root server itself???
Anyone need any more info just ask...
NOTE-
If you post a response - could you also please email aretter@fords.co.uk as the email account I setup Experts Exchange with is inaccessible to me for a couple of days.
Thanks
Adam Retter
aretter@fords.co.uk
Server 1 - 10.0.0.134 (PDC - Running Active Directory and DNS Server).
Network Settings has 10.0.0.134 and 212.104.129.9 and 212.104.129.65 listed as DNS Servers.
DNS Server is configured as Root and has a "." zone
Server 2 - 10.0.0.130 (Member Server running IIS)
Network Settings has 10.0.0.134 and 212.104.129.9 and 212.104.129.65 listed as DNS Servers
If I got to a command prompt on Server2 and do an nslookup for mail.eclipse.co.uk. using either 212.104.129.4 or .65 DNS Servers it returns the IP address, which is Great!
However if I do a nslookup for mail.eclipse.co.uk using 10.0.0.134 DNS server then it fails and returns no result. Why is this ???
Also if i do a ping mail.eclipse.co.uk at the CMD prompt it says Unknown Host, however if I ping the IP address for mail.eclipse.co.uk (212.104.129.224) it pings fine.
Now I guess whats happening here is ping does an nslookup against the 10.0.0.134 dns server and fails and then says Unknow Host.
1)Why doesnt it then try and do an nslookup against 212.104.129.4 or then 212.104.129.65 as they are also listed as DNS servers in my Windows network settings???
2) Why doesnt the 10.0.0.134 dns server resolve the address via. one of the internet root dns servers - is it because it is setup as a root server itself???
Anyone need any more info just ask...
NOTE-
If you post a response - could you also please email aretter@fords.co.uk as the email account I setup Experts Exchange with is inaccessible to me for a couple of days.
Thanks
Adam Retter
aretter@fords.co.uk
Have you configured forwarders in DNS? You do that on the Forwarders tab of the DNS server properties. Usually, I'll configure my servers to use only the internal DNS servers. The internal DNS servers have the IP addresses of the external DNS servers listed in forwarders, and if there's a name your internal server can't resolve it will pass the request to the external server. Without forwarders configured, your internal server will only be able to resolve names that it has records for.
That's the way to go. I would go with shawn313's suggestion. That may fis your problem right away.
Place forwarders in your DNS servers so lookups are handled by someone else's server except for only the internal lookups.
Place forwarders in your DNS servers so lookups are handled by someone else's server except for only the internal lookups.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Can you expand on this a little? I have not heard of the new .NET DNS servers and am interested in doing this myself.
Have you visited new.net? They provide a lot of alternative nice TLDs, some of which ICANN did not approve. Anyways, they are showing an alternative to the very restrictive ICANN of using new TLDs. Many large providers in North America and Europe already do provide support for new.net at DNS level, so that the users do not neet to download the new.net browser plugin to use the new top-level domains.
Now, since the official root servers do not carry the new.net TLDs, new.net is offering several alternative root servers which carry both the official and the proprietary TLDs.
To use this customized root server, create a "." domain, configure it as secondary, and have it transfer the data from ns0.newdotnet.net [206.132.100.42]. Since your server then carries the whole root, it it not dependent of the new.net servers to resolve regular names. It will however, ask for new versions of the zone ever now and then and thus not become outdated.
Now, since the official root servers do not carry the new.net TLDs, new.net is offering several alternative root servers which carry both the official and the proprietary TLDs.
To use this customized root server, create a "." domain, configure it as secondary, and have it transfer the data from ns0.newdotnet.net [206.132.100.42]. Since your server then carries the whole root, it it not dependent of the new.net servers to resolve regular names. It will however, ask for new versions of the zone ever now and then and thus not become outdated.
Thanks. I have set that up on my server an I hope that works out.
Great info AvonWyss!
Great info AvonWyss!
You're welcome. To test it, just try some domains using nslookup. If they resolve correctly, the setup is fine.
Oh, I've already been testing it. It seemed to work immediately and only took a few seconds to set up.
Thanks
Thanks
ASKER
Thanks AvonWyss
Your answer was most concise and actually explained the process of changin from a root server to a primary - which is exactly what I needed.
Its okay I dont need to use the new domain names and I dont really feel happy about using them until they are approved by 'ICANN' feels a little seedy and not really part of the True web?
Thanks.
Adam Retter
Your answer was most concise and actually explained the process of changin from a root server to a primary - which is exactly what I needed.
Its okay I dont need to use the new domain names and I dont really feel happy about using them until they are approved by 'ICANN' feels a little seedy and not really part of the True web?
Thanks.
Adam Retter
Adam, thank you for the feedback and awarding me points.
However, please allow me to point out that if my comment fully satisfied you, it would have been nice of you to award me an A grade. Or was there anything I should have said but didn't?
However, please allow me to point out that if my comment fully satisfied you, it would have been nice of you to award me an A grade. Or was there anything I should have said but didn't?