Multihomed Windows 2003 DC server - prevent DNS registration of one network card

I have a multi-homed 2003 Server running as a Domain Controller. I want the
IP address on one of the network cards not to register it self with the DNS
server. I have unchecked the "register this connection's addresses in DNS"
check box on the DNS tab for the IP configuration for this network card.
Still the IP address keep showing up in the DNS server.

I have tried to delete the record manually with no success as the address
reappears at next reboot.

Anyone has any clue what makes the server register the address even though I
told it not to?


/Håkan

 

Note that this is rarely a good idea and can cause all kinds of problems
with DNS, and other things. Depending on your reasons for using this config,
you may be better off with a router or VLAN configuration.

Try posting an *unedited* ipconfig /all from this server.

 

Why is this rarely a good idea? Microsoft even made a compleate product
around the concept of a DC with two network cards (Small Business Server)??

Anyway, I want help with the question I have....I don't want and
recomendations on a solution or anything like that. Because if I can't get
the network card not to registrate it self with the DNS I will have to
figure out a compleatly different solution...like uninstalling the domain
and running without a domain.


So the question again:
How do i prevent the DC from rerigtrating one of the network cards IP
Address with the DNS server?
(I have unchecked the "register this connection's addresses in DNS" check
box on the DNS tab for the IP configuration for this network card. Still the
IP address keep showing up in the DNS server.)



C:\>ipconfig /all

Windows IP Configuration

Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : pripps
Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Snurre.local
Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown
IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : Snurre.local


Ethernet adapter VMware Network Adapter VMnet1:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : VMware Virtual Ethernet Adapter for
VMnet1
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-50-56-C0-00-01
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.101
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :


Ethernet adapter Internet:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Broadcom BCM5708C NetXtreme II GigE
(NDIS VBD Client)
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-1D-09-01-75-EE
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 194.238.76.244
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.240
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 194.238.76.241


Ethernet adapter Snurre.local:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Broadcom BCM5708C NetXtreme II GigE
(NDIS VBD Client) #2
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-1D-09-01-75-F0
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration IP Address. . . : 169.254.54.204
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.0.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :

Thanks
/Håkan

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

 

That is SBS, not yours. MS designed SBS to be that way,...regular DCs are
not.

So you are saying, "Don't tell me the truth",...and "Don't give me the
correct advice"?

So instead of doing it the correct way,...you just eliminate the Domain?

In addition to unchecking the "register this connection's addresses in DNS",
you also need to make sure that the TCP/IP Specs of that particular Nic have
a Blank DNS entry. The other Nic should have the DNS entry.

Then delete the rouge entry from.

The Broadcom BCM5708C is set to use DHCP, but there is no DHCP Server
providing an address for it, hence the 169.254.*.* address. Leave the nic
unpluged and disabled.

 

The whole concept of these newsgroups are to help other users...by answering
their questions. I think it is a bit arrogant to tell the people they ask
the wrong question, especially when you don't have all the info on the
subect.

Youy say: ""Don't tell me the truth",...and "Don't give me the correct
advice"?" with that statement you are implying that I have the wrong
solution...which you impossibly could know, since you know only a small
portion of the parameters that i have to take into account when designing
the network.

My suggestion to you is to not answer any more questions unless you really
want to help the user asking the question.

/Håkan

 

I did give you advice if you would have continued to read the rest of the
post.

It is also arrogant to think that your question could not be wrong in its
premise and that you could not possibly be following a bad design from the
beginnning which would be the "root" cause of your problem.

It is also arrogant to complain that someone doesn't have all the
information about your network, when you are the one that was supposed to
give the relevant information to them so their analysis could be more
accurate.

So, yes, your post made me mad, which was obvious.

--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------

 

SBS is its own beast. Even in SBS, it's a bad configuration. I don't use two
NICs in any of my SBS installs. That said, as Phil Windell pointed out, you
are not *using* SBS, so this is irrelevant.

Well, if you will read my reply to you very carefully, you will see that in
addition to my *politely* suggesting that this is a bad configuration, I
*also* asked you a valid question about your ipconfig details ....this
should have made it clear I intended to try and help you with your specific
question.

At this point, I must say that the tone of your reply to me, as well as that
of your replies to Phil, makes me uninclined to continue trying to help you.

If this is the case, perhaps you shouldn't ask for free tech support from
complete strangers who are kindly volunteering their time to help others in
a public newsgroup....caveat emptor. You can call Microsoft product support
services and they will give you dedicated one-on-one support for a flat
rate...currently $135/USD, I believe.

Well, that may take care of the symptom, but then, so would disconnecting
the power supply. It's a bit drastic.

<snip>

Good luck out there.

 

Obviously you are both americans, which explains your lack of logic in
realising that when somewone asks Question A they don't want answer to
Question B. Or that the their realty is wrong and they should start using
your reality instead. I hope you didn't use the same strategy in the war,
it would lead to a dissaster...ops, you did...and now the whole world hates
you.....strange...isn't it?

/H


"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

 

Actually I am English/Irish/French, and she, If I'm not mistaken, she is
French. We just live in America.

.....resulting in us being more technologically advanced than a large part of
the world over the years. We know a bad idea when we see it and look for a
better way.

A war that we won in record time. The war itself is over.
It's those in the aftermath (who aren't Americans BTW) that don't have
enough brains to stop shooting each other and everyone else around them that
keeps the problems going.
If they stopped,...we'd leave. Then they could run the place however they
want.
I guess you could always shoot that extra Nic with a AK47 and it would
probably stop registering in DNS.

Those that hate us do so because their governments and their "religious"
leaders tell them to hate us and fill thier minds with propaganda. The rest
hate us because we are more successful as a country and people want to hate
everyone who is more successful than they are themselves,...it's called
Class Envy and jealousy, and it grows like weeds everywhere you water it.

--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------

 

Why, how terribly charming and diplomatic of you to make wild, random
assumptions
such as that about my politics, not to mention my grasp of logic and
technology.

<plonk>

 

Or you just don't get IT....ever thought about that? Proboboly not since you
are always right...and why bather to to do what somewone else wants when you
can do what you want instead.....who cares if it is helpfull to the other
guy or not...as long as I have my freedom to do what I want the other guy
have to stand down...he is wrong anyway...and probobly a looser, so who
cares?


Now I am tired of your narrow minded world, your eager to do things "your
way" and your lack of empathy for others. You are obviously one of the
religious fanatics with no care for anyone but your self and only want to
impose your world on others.

/H

 

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

Hakan, I can assure you that I am an Australian of Irish/Scottish descent
and would give you much the same advice. If you persist with using an
unsupported configuration and don't supply any details of your setup, you
are on your own.

KB292822 will give you an outline of the sorts of problems multihomed
DCs present. It refers to problems with remote access but the problems are
much the same no matter how the multihoming comes about. The basic problem
is the fact that the machine name is associated with more than one IP
address, whether that name is a DNS or Netbios name.

 

I know this, it has been there same problem since windows NT 3.5.

But my question is not regarding this. It is about stopping a network card
from registering it's IP addresses with the DNS server. I don't have any
problems with anything else. If I can get the network card to stop
registrating it's address I have no problems at all. The fact that I
uncheck the register checkbox and the nic still registers it's addresses is
my problem, nothing else.

/H

 

It may not be the card at all. DHCP can do it,or some other machine can
act as a proxy.

 

Microsft has already confirmed this to be a problem in Windows 2003 which is
suposed to be soleved in SP1...still i get the problem. The reason it gets
into the DNS is most likely because Netlogon puts it the.

Anyway this is obviously a matter to complicated for the newsgroup to
handel.

/H

 

Håkan,

Try this on the second interface that you do not want register it’s IP
in DNS
1. Uncheck Register this connection's Address in DNS
2. Disable NetBIOS over TCP/IP

This should stop the second interface from registering in your DNS.

Cheers,

Cody

 

Found a solution at the following link:

The third paragraph down from Jason Tann -

http://www.egghead/forumarchives/Windows2000dns/Jan2006/post26096008.asp

Hope this does it for you.

 

Are you using DHCP to obtain the address? If that is the case, DHCP wil
register it for you

 

you want to go to the DNS manager, right click on the server, properties and select "listen on" "only the following Ip addresses". Delete the ones you don't want