DHCP and clients

[TECHNIMEX Vietnam]

I have a Windows 2000 Server in my LAN with IP range 192.168.6.x /
255.255.255.0 and it takes a role of DHCP Server and DNS Server running 24h
/ 24h. This computer is 192.168.6.1 and 192.168.6.1 configured as static
IPs. My LAN is Peer-To-Peer (Not any DC are allocated). Every computer must
connect to a CNet switch with 32 x 10/100mbps ports

I configured DHCP to supply IPs range: from 192.168.6.101 to 192.168.6.254
for those 30 computers in my LAN. DHCP leases expire after 7 days with
Automatic Update to DNS server.

But some problems appear:

1. Sometimes, when a computer is turned off for about 4 days or more, the
DHCP server can not supply any IP to it. The problem happens also when the
switch is turned off for about 20 mins and then turned on. What the error is
by DHCP server or Switch ??? The problem can be solve only when I restart
the DHCP Server and delete all leased IP in the table of IP and forced all
LAN's computer to run "ipconfig /renew" again, spending much time !

2. The Connection DNS-Suffix for any computer is not supplied. For example,
I have a DHCP-enable computer named "abc" with connetion suffix
"testdnsame.com" but I can not ping "abc.testdnsname.com" from any other
computer.

3. The DNS server operates not stably. Some Internet domain name is not
interpreted into IP accurately and sometimes it cause "Unknown host name"
for the LAN's computers when they want to browse a web page !

Some solution will be highly appreciated !

Thank you and best regards
TECHNIMEX Vietnam

 

[Phillip Windell]

I have a Windows 2000 Server in my LAN with IP range 192.168.6.x /
255.255.255.0 and it takes a role of DHCP Server and DNS Server running 24h
/ 24h. This computer is 192.168.6.1 and 192.168.6.1 configured as static
IPs. My LAN is Peer-To-Peer (Not any DC are allocated). Every computer must
connect to a CNet switch with 32 x 10/100mbps ports

The Server needs to be a DC even if none of the other machines are members.
Windows DHCP needs to be "authorized" with a Domain Controller to function
dependably. There are workarounds, but I don't like them and do not trust
their dependability.

2. The Connection DNS-Suffix for any computer is not supplied. For example,
I have a DHCP-enable computer named "abc" with connetion suffix
"testdnsame.com" but I can not ping "abc.testdnsname.com" from any other
computer.

Make the Server a DC. There is also no reason to not make the Client domain
members. There is really no point is running a "clunky" and undependable
Peer-to-Peer system to begin with,...there is no advantage to running
Peer-to-Peer,...only disadvantages and undependability.

3. The DNS server operates not stably. Some Internet domain name is not
interpreted into IP accurately and sometimes it cause "Unknown host name"
for the LAN's computers when they want to browse a web page !

All machines on the LAN (I mean *all*, even the server) use the DNS on the
server itself and should *not* use any other DNS. Then within the
configuration of your DNS service you set the ISP's DNS as a Forwarder in
the Forwarders List. If there is a firewall involved then it must allow the
Server to make outbound DNS queries to the ISP's DNS.

 

[Tran Trung Hieu]

Thank you very much, Phillip Windell.

I am wondering if I should upgrade my LAN in to a typical Client-Server LAN.
My reason is that I will buy one another PC for BDC running along with the
PDC if I upgrade the current Win2000Server box. Then, may be the speed of
the whole LAN is down as PDC now have processed much programs and procedures
than before (Authenticating, Profile loading, AD,...) ?

And another question could you please help: I am interesting in VPN with
LAN-to-LAN model. Some sources from Internet state that one host in remote
LAN could not browse all the computers in local LAN like using Network
Neighborhood even if using WINS !!! Is that right? Or is there any different
solution ?

Hope to receive your soon help.
TECHNIMEX Vietnam

 

[Phillip Windell]

Thank you very much, Phillip Windell.

I am wondering if I should upgrade my LAN in to a typical Client-Server

LAN.

You have Clients, you have a Server,...it is already Client-Server.
Running a Workgroup -vs- Domain model doesn't have anything to do with
being, or not being, Client-Server.

It is also not an "upgrade",...it is just simply a choice of one model over
another.

The Workgroup Model is diffcult and a lot of work to manage and does not
scale as your needs grow.

The Domain Model is designed to be managed and has many tools to do the job.
Domains will scale from very small networks to very large networks.

My reason is that I will buy one another PC for BDC running along with the
PDC if I upgrade the current Win2000Server box.

There is no such thing as PDCs and BDCs with Win2000 and newer Domains.
There is a "PDC Role" but it is not the same thing as what the NT4.0 PDC
was.

Then, may be the speed of the whole LAN is down as PDC now have processed much
programs and procedures than before (Authenticating, Profile loading,

AD,...) ?

No.

And another question could you please help: I am interesting in VPN with
LAN-to-LAN model. Some sources from Internet state that one host in remote
LAN could not browse all the computers in local LAN like using Network
Neighborhood even if using WINS !!! Is that right? Or is there any different
solution ?

VPNs are always trouble. VPNs are not the "next best thing to being there".
VPNs are always slow and clunky, and they always will be. You almost can
not throw enough bandwidth at them. But they are cheap and they work
(more-or-less) and so they are popular.

 

[TECHNIMEX Vietnam]

Thank you very much for your warmly help. I will try and if any problem
arised, I will contact you then.

TECHNIMEX Vietnam
http://www.technimexvn.com/Eng/