Windows SBS 2008 DHCP problem

Also, I have no idea if this means anything, but when I reboot the 2008 small business server, it sits there for over 10 minutes at the "Applying Computer Settings" screen before it let's me log in.  What is up with that?

For the "Applying Computer Settings" issue, this is often DNS related on the SBS server itself.

The primary DNS server setting in the network properties on the SBS server should point to itself.

"Have you restarted the DSL modem/router yet?

Sounds like disabling did not take effect because the Windows DHCP server is detecting that it exists for a reason."

Yes I did restart the router and verified that it's DHCP server is off.  However, I have not unplugged the router completely from the network yet.  I'll give that a try.

"The primary DNS server setting in the network properties on the SBS server should point to itself."

It is set to itself...at least in the IPv4.  The IPv6 has some mac address looking thing.

"Did you use the Getting Started Tasks found in the SBS Console?"

I set this up months ago, so I don't remember exactly if I did the Getting Started Tasks.  Today when I tried to enable the DHCP, the service was there, but stopped, and wouldn't start.  Because it wouldn't start, I really couldn't edit the settings to make sure the scope and exclusions were what I wanted.  So, I figured I would remove the role and re-add it.  When I re-added the DHCP server role, I set the scope, although it did not ask for any exlcusion ranges, but then it wouldn't start the server successfully.

"It sounds like you don't understand the product."

Well, there are many new things I don't understand about it, that is for sure.  When you say I am completely wrong about the member server thing...what I meant was that we originally were working just fine with a Windows 2003 Standard server.   They needed a second server computer to host a dedicated application, so the owner went out and found a SBS 2008 on craigslist.  I assumed I could add it to my Windows 2003 domain as just a member server, but you cannot do that.  So, I had to make a new domain and demote the old 2003 server to a member of the new domain.  So, I am not wrong about that, I just should have been more clear about what I wanted it to be a member of.  But, there are other things about this server product that are very frustrating...  For example, I used to have simple login scripts in the SYSVOL folder.  Well, with SBS, that is no longer the case from what I can figure out.  I cannot for the life of me figure out how to have my windows XP clients get a mapped network drive via login script.  It's very frustrating.  Also, all the windows XP clients now have their windows firewall forced on and they cannot be turned off.  Now, I realize my lack of understanding of this is the real problem, but why they made it so complicated and hard find is really frustrating.  But, I degress...

I'll try to remove the router and see if the DHCP starts up.  That seems to be my only option at this point.

" I assumed I could add it to my Windows 2003 domain as just a member server, but you cannot do that."

Yes you can, it is called installing SBS 2008 in Migration Mode without needing to deal with the Exchange migration, SharePoint migration, and other minor previous SBS OS specific points.

Philip

Mapped drives:

Group Policy Preferences are used to set up all mapped drives on our SBS 08 domains.

All XP clients must have the Group Policy Client Side Extensions update installed to receive any settings via GPPrefs.

See our SBS 2008 Setup Guide:
http://blog.mpecsinc.ca/2009/05/sbs-2008-setup-checklist-v111.html

Philip

Philip, Where did I go wrong then in this thread then?

https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/25337701/Adding-SBS-2008-as-a-member-server-to-existing-domain.html

I would suggest the problems are mainly with your boss.  Sorry, to be blunt, but he doesn't care about the network and I'll bet your just the most knowledgeable person about computers in the office, so it falls on you.  To have this work properly, it should have been setup properly.  How do you join the computers to the domain?  By the System Control panel or through the connect computer wizard?  The firewall settings are group policies that any consultant can fix for you (but why would you turn them off?) and the login script can be easily set through the user account properties or through a group policy.

BTW, I haven't addressed the DHCP issue because others have.  Bottom line, the SBS server should be your DHCP server and all other DHCP servers need to be off - and be certain they are off.  If the SBS server finds a DHCP server, then it shuts its own DHCP server down.

JB,

That answer was plain _wrong_!

Philip

"I would suggest the problems are mainly with your boss.  Sorry, to be blunt, but he doesn't care about the network and I'll bet your just the most knowledgeable person about computers in the office, so it falls on you.  To have this work properly, it should have been setup properly.  How do you join the computers to the domain?  By the System Control panel or through the connect computer wizard?  The firewall settings are group policies that any consultant can fix for you (but why would you turn them off?) and the login script can be easily set through the user account properties or through a group policy."

Yeah, I know that he should have purchased the right equipment/software.  I should have researched however first and got a better understanding of the small business product before telling him it was ok to buy this.

I really don't remember how I joined the computers to the domain...I remember it was different than the way I was used to with Windows 2003 standard server, but I don't remember.  Does that make a difference in how things function?

I don't necessarily want the firewall's turned off on the clients, it's just that as I was troubleshooting other things, one of the things I try is to see if the firewall is potentially blocking what ever is not working.  It was just an example of some of my frustrations with SBS 2008.   It's been a while, but I remember it being difficult to find this policy...but then again, my understanding of how 2008 SBS handles group policy is not good.

With regards to the DHCP, there is no other DHCP server on in the office.  The router is saying it's off.  I need to wait until after hours before physically removing it.

"This sounds like you demoted the SBS 2003, which is a licensing violation. When you did so did you disable the DHCP service on it."

The old server was not SBS.  It was a standard Windows 2003 server, running everything perfectly fine.

Perfect.
I assume it is not currently running DHCP?  If so that would stop the DHCP service on the SBS2008.

Cliff,

I appreciate what you had to say in your post.  First off, yes, there is a larger problem here with owner of the small business that I work for on the side (who is having this problem).  He does everything on the cheap, and tries to cut corners everywhere possible.  Regardless of what I tell him about his computer systems, he still makes his choices based on dollars for the most part.  But, he is the owner and has final say in what happens.

Second, I could write quite a few pages on what this situation looks like, and how I ended up with a problematic server, why "I don't remember what was done exactly", etc. etc.  But, I don't think I would get much help here on Experts Exchange if they had to read a short novel explaining why I have done the things I have done and the why I made the decsions to get to the point where I am at.  I try to keep my questions to the point and as brief as possible with as little extra "reasons why this happened in the first place..." stuff as possible.  This a a very small business, with poor management...when it comes to IT related issues.  He pays me basically nothing on the side, and I really am not his best option, but he refuses to pay higher cost.  Likewise, due to the meager side pay I receive, I only go so far with my time in trying to keep his server and network running.  There is A LOT more to it than that, but I'll leave it at that for now.

Third, my first comment on my original question was about how much of a pain 2008 SBS was compared to Widnows 2003 Standard server.  That apparently struck a cord with many of the responses here and caused a few "defensive" responses.  I understand that, and I will try to keep my frustrations to myself on future questions.  However, I do find it humorous as I read the responses about how Small Business Server is designed for small businesses who don't have IT help, and how easy it is...yet, all the responses on this thread seem to have little nuiances that most people would not know about, let alone an IT person.  For example, you mentioned how that removing and re-installing a role was precisely the wrong thing to do.  So if it is so wrong, why does Microsoft even have an option to remove and add roles?  I have installed and managed many successful Windows 2003 standard server installations, and adding and removing roles has never been a problem for me on that platform.  Likewise, if SBS is so great, how is it that I posted a thread months ago on this forum asking how to make it a member server on my Windows 2003 domain, only to have a bunch of different people, some highly ranked, tell me it cannot be done (as verified by most google search results)...then someone on this thread says it can be done?  Seems there is some misinformation out there, and some information is only known by few people.  My only point here is that SBS has not been easy coming from a Windows 2003 server background (non-SBS).  I know I don't know enough about it and my lack of knowledge is the real problem, but when I think I know the older product pretty well, and just want to do some basic things with SBS, and can't things done, it gets frustrating.  I didn't mean to be attacking, just frustrated.

I have seen so many technical questions asked on tech forums like this, where the guy is just asking a simple question, but can't get a simple answer, because people want to tell him an alternate way of doing things or tell him his approach is wrong.  I don't assume I know the full story with each question that is asked on a forum like this.  Most guys just need help with an answer on how to do something, not a lecture (read this poor guy's thread if you want to know what I mean...the poor guy never gets an answer to his question and is just told that what he wants to do shouldn't be done http://forums.techarena.in/small-business-server/1211174.htm ).  I am not saying this stuff if happening here, but it's frustrating to get lectured on the methods, when I just am looking for a simple answer and don't want to spend five or six paragraphs defending and explaining how and why I got to point I am at.  I do appreciate what you said however, and it is good advice.

I am going to assign points here and close this question.  Feel free to discuss further, and I didn't mean to get so long winded.  Thanks for all the help everyone.

Thanks jbobst, and thanks for the feedback. It agree it is always difficult to be stuck between the right decision and a controlled budget. As Cliff has done, I have often walked away from clients that will not follow best practices. I did so this week with a three year client that refused to address backup issues. Fact is when the system comes crashing down I guarantee it will be on your shoulders.

TechSoEasy the SBS guru here user to say on a daily basis "SBS2003 is not Server 2003". :-)  The same applies to 2008 and is very true.

The folk that have the most problems with SBS are usually the ones that are quite familiar with server standard because you cannot use the old familiar tools and methods. If somebody not familiar with servers starts with SBS they usually find it very easy, and simply follow the wizards. That is absolutely critical with SBS. There are far to many interrelated services to manually configure.
Three rules to live by with SBS:
-ALWAYS use the wizards
-Install all services even if you don't want to use all ( done by default with 2008)
-Accept defaults whenever possible

Cheers!
--Rob

I agree with both Rob and Cliff in regard to SBS.

In the end, I found SBS to be a great tool that provided insight into the way Microsoft would configure a production grade server with all of its components being configured by the wizards. How? By digging into all of those components both before and after the wizards ran to see just how those changes were made.

SBS is a great product, and like any software product it requires an understanding of the how/why things are done the way they are.

Philip Elder

You've made a few interesting points that actually do have answers, so I've cut and pasted the pertinent questions or comments and responded below.

my first comment on my original question was about how much of a pain 2008 SBS was compared to Widnows 2003 Standard server.  That apparently struck a cord with many of the responses here and caused a few "defensive" responses.  I understand that, and I will try to keep my frustrations to myself on future questions.

Some people are defensive. I personally think "the right tool for the job" and hold little loyalty to vendors or products. With that said, SBS 2008 *is* a great product for the small business, so I'm not defensive because of your opinion, but because of how you formed that opinion. It was formed on lack of appropriate information, and that is unfair to *any* product. I'd be just as defensive if someone came and criticized a TV for taking way too long to cook an egg when they set the frying pan on top of it (and many TVs get warm enough that this isn't too far fetched.) So take my "defensiveness" in that vein and you'll see where I'm coming from. I won't speak for others on their attitudes.

However, I do find it humorous as I read the responses about how Small Business Server is designed for small businesses who don't have IT help, and how easy it is...yet, all the responses on this thread seem to have little nuiances that most people would not know about, let alone an IT person.

TWO key points:
First, SBS, like any complex product, should not be operated without reading "the manual" first. Yes, SBS is designed to be run in a business without dedicated IT staff. The wizards allow a day-to-day office worker to maintain users, email, etc. But even that office worker will require training. The nuances you mentioned are clearly documented in every SBS book, and you'll notice that my previous comment made it quite clear that a minor investment in a book and an evening of reading is not out of line for a multi-thousand dollar server investment. That book and that knowledge would help both an office worker responsible for day-to-day work and an IT pro who may not be familiar with the peculiarities of SBS get up to speed.
Secondly, SBS is meant to run without intervention from IT for *DAY TO DAY* tasks. Significant network changes, initial setup, and other such stuff should ALWAYS be done by a professional. To draw an analogy, you can drive your car just fine, but unless you are a skilled mechanic, you shouldn't be messing with the timing belts or performing significant repairs.

For example, you mentioned how that removing and re-installing a role was precisely the wrong thing to do.  So if it is so wrong, why does Microsoft even have an option to remove and add roles?  I have installed and managed many successful Windows 2003 standard server installations, and adding and removing roles has never been a problem for me on that platform.

This is always the catch-22 MS is forced to evaluate with SBS and it isn't new. Adding and removing roles is something an office worker would never do. It isn't part of the SBS console and isn't wizardized, so there is little chance that a non-IT person would break SBS.
So lets discuss the IT professional. MS hopes that the IT pro will be familiar with SBS (and offers books and such to *get* IT pros familiar with SBS) so again, the IT pro won't break the system.
Or, alternatively, MS can install blocks so that tasks that IT pros can do on "standard" servers *CANNOT* be done on SBS. There are legitimate times when an experiences admin *familiar with SBS* and knowing when to do some tasks, and the repurcussions those tasks will have, would want to perform advanced maintenance. So blocks only serve to make maintenance harder for limited gain (to prevent an IT person who isn't familiar with SBS from doing things they shouldn't be doing anyways.) It is an unfortunate trade-off, but one that I think MS lande on the right side of. Can you imagine how many people would scream that MS is totalitarian and fascist if they started blocking all sorts of functionality in SBS?

Likewise, if SBS is so great, how is it that I posted a thread months ago on this forum asking how to make it a member server on my Windows 2003 domain, only to have a bunch of different people, some highly ranked, tell me it cannot be done (as verified by most google search results)...then someone on this thread says it can be done?  Seems there is some misinformation out there, and some information is only known by few people.

There is unquestionably misinformation. There is still the *persistent* belief that SBS can be the only domain controller on a network. This isn't a "little known" item that SBSers keep to themselves. We blog it, we scream it from the hilltops, and yet that rumor persists. So the "if SBS is so great" simply doesn't apply. SBS cannot be held accountable because people are stupid and don't read about a product they are maintaining. ....and for the record, I am not insulting you, I am simply stating that some people truly are stupid...as harsh as that sounds....and don't even try to learn a product. You, at least, came to EE to ask your question. That takes you out of the camp of people I'm referring to.
But I've seen *regular* EE contributors say that SBS can be the only domain controller. Drives me batty. I just want to send them a nasty email and tell them to return to used-car sales, because they shouldn't be in IT.

My only point here is that SBS has not been easy coming from a Windows 2003 server background (non-SBS).  I know I don't know enough about it and my lack of knowledge is the real problem, but when I think I know the older product pretty well, and just want to do some basic things with SBS, and can't things done, it gets frustrating.  I didn't mean to be attacking, just frustrated.

This has always been true of SBS. People with IT backgrounds struggle with SBS until they are familiar with it because it *is* different. People with 2000 struggled with SBS 2000. People familiar with 2003 wanted to do things and broke SBS 2003 regularly (I'm sure if you think about it, you had to *learn* SBS 2003 too...) and sadly, because of the *big* changes in the core OS from Windows 2003 to 2008 (not just SBS) that means that knowing SBS 2003 doesn't mean you know SBS 2008 either. The change from XP to Vista, 2003 to 2008, and SBS 2003 toSBS 2008 are each uniquely painful, but once you get over that hurdle, it is worthwhile.
Good luck,
-Cliff