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