Avatar of Ikky786
Ikky786
 asked on

New windows 2012 r2 domain controller settings

I am setting up a new domain controller in an office.

Can somebody please confirm the correct settings. I believe it is the following.

For server:

192.168.0.25
255.255.255.0
192.168.0.1

primary dns: 192.168.0.25
secondary dns: 192.168.0.1

work stations:

192.168.0.X
255.255.255.0
192.168.0.1

primary dns: 192.168.0.25
secondary dns: 192.168.0.1

DHCP is setup on router no the windows 2012 server - that how I want it.

Are these setting correct? Please assist
Microsoft Legacy OSWindows NetworkingNetworking

Avatar of undefined
Last Comment
masnrock

8/22/2022 - Mon
Aaron

Those settings are technically sound; are you having issues using that network configuration?
Ikky786

ASKER
im actually replacing a windows 2003 server. The previous IT guy had these settings:

server:

server ip: 10.0.0.1
subnet: 255.0.0.0
default gateway: 10.0.0.2
primary dns : 10.0.0.2
secondary dns: 8.8.8.8

workstation:

ip: 10.0.0.14
subnet: 255.0.0.0
default gateway: 10.0.0.2
DNS servers: 10.0.0.1
Primary WINS server: 10.0.0.2

DHCP is setup on the router- so the workstation receive network settings dynamically. The funny thing is WINS is not installed on the windows 2003 server so why is the ipconfig /all on the workstation showing Primary WINS server as being 10.0.0.2.  The funny thing is these settings are working, but how? Are they correct?
Aaron

If the settings you just posted are working, then the network configuration you're looking to move towards will not work without making changes on the rest of the environment.  A couple things to keep in mind:

192.168.x.x will not work if the gateway is still 10.0.0.2, are you planning on changing the gateway to a 192.168.0.x address as well?

If WINS is not in use then there shouldn't be any issue removing it from the settings.

The environment is currently a /8, that seems a bit extreme for a single office.  If you stay with the 10.x.x.x subnet I would recommend subnetting further, going with a /16 (10.0.x.x) or even a /24 if you can get away with 254 IPs.  

Is the current 2003 server a domain controller as well?  You'll want to ensure you cleanly move roles (if they exist) to the new server and make necessary changes to AD sites and services if the IP schema changes to 192.x.x.x.
I started with Experts Exchange in 2004 and it's been a mainstay of my professional computing life since. It helped me launch a career as a programmer / Oracle data analyst
William Peck
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Barry Molenwijk

Log in or sign up to see answer
Become an EE member today7-DAY FREE TRIAL
Members can start a 7-Day Free trial then enjoy unlimited access to the platform
Sign up - Free for 7 days
or
Learn why we charge membership fees
We get it - no one likes a content blocker. Take one extra minute and find out why we block content.
Not exactly the question you had in mind?
Sign up for an EE membership and get your own personalized solution. With an EE membership, you can ask unlimited troubleshooting, research, or opinion questions.
ask a question
masnrock

Unless 192.168.0.1 is a device that can handle DNS, there should be no mention of it anywhere.

Also, a domain controller sometimes runs into issues when a second DNS server is at play. Get rid of the second entry.

Is the router configured for your proposed subnet?