Win2K Dynamic DNS behavior with BIND

Barry Finkel b19141 at achilles.ctd.anl.gov
Tue Sep 11 13:58:59 UTC 2001


<eric at spamdomainsbanned.lib.usf.edu> wrote:

>I'm hoping someone can either explain this behavior, or maybe get
>the word back to the weenies at M$ that something is wrong.
>    Here's the deal:

<<much of the long post about W2k deleted>>

>    Finally, it takes setting the network properties to *send* it's DNS
>updates, *as well as* entering the registry hack for
>"RegisterDNSARecords" to 1 to get the 2K DC to send any updates ... and
>then it sends the 3 that I would prefer it not to send (which are denied
>by the BIND configuration anyway).

I believe that some of the concerns in this posting is covered in my
posting on August 03.  I would suggest that you ignore the denied DDNS
to the BIND server when the netlogon process is trying to register the
"A" records; that is what I do.  As for the SRV records in the "_"
zones, they really do not need DDNS (unless you are going to add or
remove a DC).  Once the initial records are placed in the zone (either
vi DDNS or via a copy of the netlogon-produced file), the records do
not change.

If you think that the MS code needs changing, talk to MS.  I have
submitted a handful of change requests to MS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry S. Finkel
Electronics and Computing Technologies Division
Argonne National Laboratory          Phone:    +1 (630) 252-7277
9700 South Cass Avenue               Facsimile:+1 (630) 252-9689
Building 221, Room B236              Internet: BSFinkel at anl.gov
Argonne, IL   60439-4844             IBMMAIL:  I1004994



More information about the bind-users mailing list