DNS+DHCP

[heymrdj]

I'm setting up my Windows Server 2003 Enterprise edition LAN server. I've gotten DHCP on there before. What I need now is also to run a DNS server. The Windows Server will have the website www.bcx3.local, which will be the local test and file storage site for LAN parties. So I know i need a local DNS server to be able to "make" domains. Question is, i've only ever done this with linux (Debian Sarge and Etch to be exact), but now I need to be able to use Windows Server 2003. Any good guides? I need to also put forwarders in to some Speakeasy public DNS servers, that way internet comes as it should and my DNS server is only authoritive of my local domain(s). I'm not used to Windows networking, so anyone help a poor newb .

EDIT: Also, people are bringing home systems. If I need to give them internet through my system, do i need to install the NAT role (under VPN and Remote Access) to do so after setting up my DNS server? The order should be DNS, then DHCP, then NAT correct?



Jack MDS, I'm sure you know all this and more in that infinite Microsoft Network head. Please grace me with even a pinky full of your blessed knowledge. I will kiss your feet

EDIT Also: I'd like to say that whatever user(s) get me help that gets my job done good and fast (i'm very limited on time to spend on the project) get's credit mentioned to my college on my webpage. No it's not much..but..you'll be mentioned .

 

[jlazzaro]

Internal DNS, and simply create a forwarder entry to something like 4.2.2.2.

NAT is going to depend on how everything else is setup. Are you trying to segment them from the rest of the network, or do you not have a router to perform NAT functions? If so, yes, VPN and Remote Access, see NAT tutorial.

 

[heymrdj]

Originally posted by: jlazzaro
Internal DNS, and simply create a forwarder entry to something like 4.2.2.2.

Wow...one month of googling...and..nothing like this site came up. This site shows IIS and DNS and DHCP EXACTLY as i want....I mean it's step by step everything I want. *kisses your feet* YOU HAVE SAVED ME SOOO MUCH HEADACHE!!!! I would write you a fricking check right now..

 

[jlazzaro]

glad i could help...i also edited my original post to reflect your NAT question.

 

[heymrdj]

Originally posted by: jlazzaro
glad i could help...i also edited my original post to reflect your NAT question.

I can't wait to go home and try all this on a fresh installation today.

I've read that NAT article and I do believe it's what i need, i know where I screwed up, was the DNS forwarders on the DNS server which NAT was using, which made everything unreachable.

This server will be the network router. It will take the connection given by the wireless router of the school (wireless connection DHCP provided is the only thing available). I then need NAT to share that internet connection to the gaming rigs on the network. So no segregation is really necessary, just need a connection.

 

[heymrdj]

A little off topic, but does anyone know how to load balance two NIC's without the NIC's supporting Windows Server Load Balancing. I have 3NIC's in the server, it would be great if i could assign them all statics, then my IIS/PHP/MySQLfile databast could load balance acrossed 3 100mbs NIC's instead of just one 100mbs NIC.

 

[jlazzaro]

Originally posted by: heymrdj
A little off topic, but does anyone know how to load balance two NIC's without the NIC's supporting Windows Server Load Balancing. I have 3NIC's in the server, it would be great if i could assign them all statics, then my IIS/PHP/MySQLfile databast could load balance acrossed 3 100mbs NIC's instead of just one 100mbs NIC.

not going to happen with consumer grade equipment...forget about it

 

[heymrdj]

It's easy enough to do so with multiple servers with multiple apaches. And you could even fool the system by binding 3 apache's to the 3 different NIC's and then setting up mod_balance on each one. That would create a session aware loadbalance effect across 2 NIC's with one NIC being the listener. But 3 apache installations is alot of overhead, I was just wondering if it was possible to do less.