in message : "Roland Hall" <nobody@nowhere> a écrit dans le message de
: : > Hi Vince...
: >
: > I'm concerned with the fact that you're using a private network and a
: public
: > network on the same server.
: > If this an ISA box, one might be able to understand but even then, I
: > wouldn't put my ISA box on the border of my network.
: >
: > You have:
: >
: > Net -> [outside NIC - W2K Server - inside NIC] -> LAN
: > Net -> [217.* - W2K Server - 192.*/10.* ->] LAN
: >
: > Why is the wireless device on a different internal subnet?
: > Why is a router not involved [VLAN] to connect the two internal subnets?
:
: The second IP is used in case the wireless AP is reset. I can change its
IP,
: of course. But when it's reset it gets 192.168.<something I have to look
in
: the book for I don't remember>.
:
: So for conveniency I left the "fallback" IP on the NIC. But, I repeat, my
: problems occurred before I managed to do this. They occurred as soon as I
: finished W2K adv. server confiuration. Every NIC had only *one* IP at that
: time.
:
: So I don't understand why we are talking on this particular "issue".
Probably because that is the way you have it now. It is an unknown since
you are the first I have heard of doing that. I have bound multiple IP
addresses on the same NIC before but not on different networks.
: Ok,
: adding a second IP with a different subnet to my NIC could result in some
: troubles of whatever kind. But those troubles would never have occurred
: ***before*** that moment, would they?
Hard to say what would have occurred before. However, it is also hard to
test the way they are configured currently.
: So the DNS latencies I'm seeing are *not* due to having a second IP on my
: NIC, are they?
I have no idea. Let's look at some other questions:
1. Why have you not gone back to a single IP on a single NIC to test?
2. Why is this being done in production?
To MSFT, a private LAN is separate from a public LAN. Even before active
directory, most of us knew DNS on a private LAN should be separate from a
public LAN. They don't need to know about each other. Your clients get
their DNS from the local DNS server. If they request a public address, the
DNS can, either through root hosts or (a) forwarder(s), forward the request
to be resolved for the public address. It will then cache the response so
subsequent queries, within the ttl for the cached entry, will not have to be
forwarded.
Your local DNS name should be dotted. ex. domain.local No servers or
workstations should have in their network settings looking at a public DNS
server. I believe with ISA, this does not apply to the public NIC, just the
private one.
Why is this included on the LAN NIC settings?
Liste de recherche de suffixe DNS : mydomain.local
teledisnet.be
Also, are you running in native mode?
--
Roland Hall
/* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
or fitness for a particular purpose. */
Online Support for IT Professionals -
http://support.microsoft.com/servicedesks/technet/default.asp?fr=0&sd=tech
How-to: Windows 2000 DNS:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;308201
FAQ W2K/2K3 DNS:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;291382