Trying to setup DNS/DHCP server... I said "trying" - Update

[GeSuN]

No, not really. You need to take the error numbers and check them at the Microsoft knowledge base.

Justin, just to let you know that I've found the following website wich is very helpfull for the Event ids you get

Linky

 

[JustinLerner]

If the router is your Internet access router, then yes, 192.168.0.1 would be the gateway address.

If you are using DHCP on your server and all your clients are set to automatically obtain their IP addresses from the DHCP server, then the gateway and DNS server addresses will automatically update on all your LAN clients when they reboot.

 

[GeSuN]

Ok, but if I understand well, when I go in my DHCP manager (Start, Programs, Administrative Tools, DHCP) if I expand my DHCP server, I'll find the "Scope" I created and the "Server Options". Now, if I expand the "Scope" option and go in the "Scope Options", I have the following options :

Option Name Vendor Value Class
----------------------------- ------------ --------------- -------
003 Router Standard 192.168.0.1 None
006 DNS Servers Standard 192.168.0.2 None
015 DNS Domain Name Standard whatever.com None

Now, do I have to set the value for the 003 Router to 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.0.2? IMO I would set it to 192.168.0.2 but I just want to make sure of this...

Thanks!!

 

[Saltin]

The gateway is the way out of the local subnet/segment. That means, whenever the computer in question has a packet to send that isnt on the local subnet (In this case I would guess its 192.168.0.0/24), it gets sent to the gateway. The gateway is assumed to be a router or proxy that will know how to get the packet to its destination.

That means your 003 router option is 192.168.0.1.

Think of the gateway as the door to outside networks. Your domain controller doesnt provide that, nor (in my opinion) should it.

 

[GeSuN]

The gateway is the way out of the local subnet/segment. That means, whenever the computer in question has a packet to send that isnt on the local subnet (In this case I would guess its 192.168.0.0/24), it gets sent to the gateway. The gateway is assumed to be a router or proxy that will know how to get the packet to its destination.

That means your 003 router option is 192.168.0.1.

Think of the gateway as the door to outside networks. Your domain controller doesnt provide that, nor (in my opinion) should it.

Yes my subnet is set to 192.168.0.0/24. Thanks for the informations! I'll let the 003 router option set to 192.168.0.1 .

Right now I'm on the process to correct every errors or warnings there is in the Event viewer...

I have to admit both of you guys helped me a lot! Thanks!

 

[GeSuN]

Ok, I've setup one Win98 computer to log on the Domain. It logs and everything but the problem is the client is still getting it's ip by the router DHCP service, and not by the server it self...

how can I force it to use the DHCP service from the server?

 

[Saltin]

Turn off DHCP on the router.

 

[GeSuN]

Forgot to mention that I already had disabled the router's DHCP service... but if I do ipconfig /all on the client, it still tells me that the DHCP server is my router (wich is 192.168.0.1)...

 

[Saltin]

Try an ipconfig /renew
and then an ipconfig /all

 

[GeSuN]

I tryed that many times... still not working...

I also tryed to connect both computer directly with a cross over cable... the client can still log on the domain, but it doesn't find the DHCP server so it keps the IP it had before I disconnected them from the network... when they were both connected with the cross over cable, i tryed ipconfig /renew too, but it kept telling me that there wasn't any DHCP server!!!

now, is it my client that is the problem or my server?

 

[PlatinumGold]

I'm not sure if i missed this part or not, but did you activate your scope??

there are 2 parts to getting your dhcp operational. first you have to AUTHORIZE the DHCP Server, then you define the scope, then you have to ACTIVATE it.

also, do you have a win2k client?? i don't like using win98 clients to test my win2k domain because it has it's own inherent weaknesses (or mb just my ignorance of win9x).

anyway, if you have a win2k client, have it join the domain. then you'll know ur dhcp is ok.

 

[GeSuN]

there are 2 parts to getting your dhcp operational. first you have to AUTHORIZE the DHCP Server, then you define the scope, then you have to ACTIVATE it.

Hi PlatinumGold, yes I did autorize it and activate it, but thanks for making sure

I'll do what you suggest and try a W2k client today, so I'll see from there if it's the client or the server that is causing the problem...

 

[GeSuN]

Ok, I've tryed a W2k client on my network and it's working, so I guess it's only a problem with my Win98 Client, or maybe there is something missing on my server to enable the client to connect to it???


Also, when I go in the My Network Places, there is 2 networks... The Domain I created and another called "Workgroup"... The weird thing is the client and the server appears in both networks... Why???

EDIT : Ok never mind the "Workgroup" thing, I was seeying this the first time I booted the client and changed it to log on a Domain, so I guess it was just the workgroup of the client...

So now I only need to know if I have special things to do to my win98 client to make it use the DHCP server of my server...

 

[PlatinumGold]

GeSun

My experience w/ Win9x and Win2k Domains has been very bad. Unless you absolutely have to i wouldn't.

IF you are going to use win9x, I strongly recommend using Static IP addresses for the win9x clients. that's the only way i've been able to get the Win9x clients fully functional is w/ static ips.

 

[GeSuN]

So I guess it would be better if I had a range of reserved IPs for my win9x clients...

But I would really like to be able to use DHCP with my win9x clients... because upgrading these clients to W2k pro isnt an option.

 

[JustinLerner]

You can use DHCP with Windows 9x/ME clients but you might have more user/client frustration (and increased support calls) with the "inability to connect to the LAN" because of problems releasing and renewing IP addresses.

I have no idea why Win 9x inconsistently causes IP address leases to persistently stick while on other occassions it works properly, but in my opinon, MS hasn't fully acknowledged or documented procedures to consistenly make Win 9x work properly with DHCP. If you have many Win 9x clients, static IP addresses are probably not practical and create more problems with moves, relocations of PC's from one area to another (inter-departmental, inter-site, etc.)
Here's some recognition of the problem by Microsoft:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q224175

Win 9x/ME clients doesn't always reliably release and renew IP addresses from DHCP servers like they should, even when done manually (which isn't mentioned by Microsoft) through the winipcfg /release and then winipcfg /renew, but there are other more extreme, drastic ways to 'force' it when manual release/renewals and rebooting don't work. For example, by temporarily changing anything in the network settings (step 1, adding NetBEUI protocol, then rebooting; step 2, release and renew the IP address manually on the client after the reboot (check the IP address with winipcfg /all) and then revert the network protocol configurations and settings to the settings as they were before step 1- remove NetBEUI; step 3, reboot and verify the correct IP address).

The two primary problems with Win 9x/ME when using 2000 Servers is that you need to enable LM and NTLM capabilites on your 2000 DC Group policy [this decreases security as opposed to using the pure NTLM2 authenication with Windows 2000/XP]. The second problem is that Win 9x/3.x requires reboots for all changes to the IP addressing, IP lease release/renewals and then confirmation upon reboot.
Since you have a 2000 DC, you should also install the Win9x Directory Services client found on the 2000 Server CD under \CLIENTS\WIN9X.

Here's more, older info on MS DHCP for Win95 and NT3.x/4. Please note, the use of a WINS server may improve the ability for 2000 Servers to communicate with MS OS's prior to Windows 2000/XP, but may have no relation to the capability or reliability of Win9x to release and renew IP addresses.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q121005

--
Windows 2000 is the first Microsoft OS which can be used in a pure DNS server environment (ie, not requiring WINS) by not using NetBIOS. So, if you disable NetBIOS support in 2000 Server or use NTLM2 authentication only, your Win9x clients will not be able to properly access the 2000 server, authenticate, or view network resources. Also, if DNS clients which are not NetBIOS capabale (typically Unix variants, or 2000/XP without NetBIOS) are on the system, WINS is necessary with DNS for these clients to 'see' older Windows clients which require NetBIOS (9x/ME/3.x/NT3.x/NT4).

 

[GeSuN]

Hi Justin... a big thank you for all that info!!!

About the LM and NTLM capabilites that I have to enable, i've found a site on MS that says I could enable NTLM 2 on win 9x computers... do you think it would be better just to do this and forget about LM and NTLM?

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;Q239869&

 

[JustinLerner]

I didn't realise the the 9x Directory Services client provided NTLM2 capability with registry modifications, however I did recommend the 9x Directory Services client, found on the [CD drive]:\clients\win9x.

I would do what you read there in the MS URL. If you have many 9x workstations, figure out how to do this through remote registry services and scripting if possible.

I don't know if using soley NTLM2 will effect the DHCP automatic release/renewals for Win9x clients (I doubt it), but would be interested to know if it affects the DHCP 9x client problems in any way. NTLM2 will ensure greater network security. If you can use it on all workstations, it is a better solution.

Remember, any change to the network protocols or IP stack will provide a temporary release/renew capability upon reboot (Windows NT variants have no such problems), but even the same 9x client will not necessarily act consistently in the future. This is especially true when clients are disconnected from the network, like in 9x client laptops.

Let us know how your results compare!

 

[Garion]

We had a huge problem with DHCP when we moved our PC's from Windows 95 to Windows 98. It turned out to be our Cisco switches. Here's the scoop.

With Windows 95, if it doesn't get a DHCP address the first time around, it waits and tries again until it does. Windows 98, however, tries only once. When it fails, it gives itself a 167.x.x.x IP address, designed for use in networks without a DHCP server.

It turns out that our Cisco switches were doing a bunch of tests as the PC was booting, and didn't finish before the PC sent it's DHCP request, so the request never made it to the network. These "tests" included checking for a spanning tree loop, seeing if there was a trunk active opn the other end and looking for a Fast EtherChannel. By the time all of this was done, it was too late and the PC had given itself a 167.x.x.x IP.

There's a single command somewhere you can use on a Cisco switch to disable this. Just remember to enable BPDU-guard, to enable against spanning tree loops, as you'll be shutting off spanning tree detection .

- G

 

[GeSuN]

Justin, I'll try what's on the link. And post the results later for sure

Garion, thanks for the info, but I don't have Cisco switches nor will we have soon (or ever) cause we are only a small company, and I don't think we need that kind of equipment right now...

 

[Dug]

Can someone explain why this is bad again.

Modem==> Router==> Server==> Switch==> Clients

Server supplies DCHP, DNS, R&R access. DC with 2k clients. We have this setup and it has worked flawlessly for the last year.

I don't see the benifit of Modem==> Router==> Switch==> Server and Clients

The server is behind the router in either case with private ip's.

 

[Saltin]

Router=>Server=>Switch=>Clients

You are routing all your internet traffic through the Server and then upstream on to the Router, correct?

Why place that load on your server? It doesnt need it, it's not necessary.

 

[Dug]

You are routing all your internet traffic through the Server and then upstream on to the Router, correct?
Why place that load on your server? It doesnt need it, it's not necessary.

It doesn't really put a load on the server. For 20 clients with roaming profiles that need to be carefully monitored. Realistically a good firewall in the loop would be beneficial to handle the monitoring. But then again if we had enough money we would also have another server. We actually don't even need server. Most 20-50 employee companies don't. But it makes it a lot easier to keep track of people and what they are doing.

Let me ask you this:
If you only had 20 clients and had to monitor everything going on, how would you set it up. (Limited budget.)

I'm not saying my setup is correct, it just works.