Some questions when operating with 2 NICS

[Ohaya]

Hi,

We have a Win2K Advanced Server system, with 2 NICs. Machine name is,
say, "foo".

Originally, only one of the NICs was enabled, and configured to use
DHCP, and it got an IP address something like 10.5.2.208, and it got an
IP address for the DNS server pointing to our corporate DNS server.

With the above, other machines on the corporate network could get to a
website on this machine using a web browser by using http://foo

This server was configured as a root domain controller (i.e., there are
no domain controllers "above" it).

Then, today, we enabled the 2nd NIC, and plugged it into the network.
Again, this 2nd NIC was configured to use DHCP, and it got an IP address
of something like 10.5.3.64.


What I'm puzzled about is:

1) If I'm on this machine "foo", and I "ping foo", the IP address it
shows is the 10.5.3.64.

2) But, if I'm on any other machine on the network, and I "ping foo",
the address it shows is the 10.5.2.208.


In other words, the machine name "foo" appears to resolve to two
different IP addresses, depending upon from which machine the "ping" is
run.


Can someone explain why this is happening?


Thanks in advance!

Jim

 

[Ohaya]

Hi,

We have a Win2K Advanced Server system, with 2 NICs. Machine name is,
say, "foo".

Originally, only one of the NICs was enabled, and configured to use
DHCP, and it got an IP address something like 10.5.2.208, and it got an
IP address for the DNS server pointing to our corporate DNS server.

With the above, other machines on the corporate network could get to a
website on this machine using a web browser by using http://foo

This server was configured as a root domain controller (i.e., there are
no domain controllers "above" it).

Then, today, we enabled the 2nd NIC, and plugged it into the network.
Again, this 2nd NIC was configured to use DHCP, and it got an IP address
of something like 10.5.3.64.

What I'm puzzled about is:

1) If I'm on this machine "foo", and I "ping foo", the IP address it
shows is the 10.5.3.64.

2) But, if I'm on any other machine on the network, and I "ping foo",
the address it shows is the 10.5.2.208.

In other words, the machine name "foo" appears to resolve to two
different IP addresses, depending upon from which machine the "ping" is
run.

Can someone explain why this is happening?

Thanks in advance!

Jim

[I'm cross-posting this to the DNS NG, as I'm now wondering if this has
something to do with MS DNS...]

Hi,

I've been thinking about this more, and a couple of things that I forgot
to mention in my original post:

The server machine ("foo") happens to have MS DNS Server installed on
it. I think that the reason that this slipped my mind was that when we
used ipconfig, it showed that both NICs had DNS IP addresses (retrieved
via DHCP, I'm guessing) pointing to the corporate DNS server.

We also originally noted a kind of puzzling behavior when trying to
"ping foo" from server "foo": Even if we put an entry in the etc\hosts
file, the ping would not return the IP address in the etc\hosts file.


I'm now wondering if something like the following may be happening:

1) When we originally had only 1 NIC enabled on machine "foo", when we
"ping foo" from machine "foo" itself, the name resolution was being done
by the DNS server on machine "foo", while when we "ping foo" from a
different machine, the name resolution was being done by the corporate
DNS server.

2) When we enabled the 2nd NIC on machine "foo", this somehow causes the
DNS server on machine "foo" to be updated to use the IP address assigned
to the 2nd NIC, but doing a "ping foo" from a different machine still is
using the corporate DNS server for name resolution.


The above would kind of explain what we're actually seeing, but in order
for the above scenario to be correct, this seems to imply that:

1) Enabling the 2nd NIC on machine "foo" causes the DNS server on
machine "foo" to be updated to the IP address of the 2nd NIC, and

2) The "order" of name resolution seems to be such that the DNS server
on machine "foo" is taking priority over both the etc\hosts file and the
DNS server(s) being pointed to in ipconfig.


I'm kind of puzzled about all of this, because I always thought that the
FIRST place name resolution takes place is using the etc\hosts file,
before any DNS server.


Can anyone provide some insight into all of this???

Thanks,
Jim

 

[Marina Roos]

What are you using the 2nd nic for?

marina

 

[Ohaya]

Hi Marina,

It's kind of a complicated story, and I was hoping to not get into it,
but I think that my questions may be a bit puzzling without an
explanation .

Ok, we started with just one NIC enabled, with 1 IP address, and we were
running a website that was "bound" to that IP address. This original
website has SSL enabled, with both client and server authentication.

Within this web application, we need to retrieve some info from this
same website, but for a couple of reasons, we want to enable SSL with
only server authentication. But, at the same time, we need to do this
without changing the URL to do this retrieval, because this code is
being done somewhere else.

So, the original idea that I came up with was to "fool" the system, but
configuring a second website under IIS, and bind it to a second IP
address, where both the IP address and website are physically on the
same machine. We would do this (I thought) by using the etc\hosts file,
and putting the same hostname in there, but pointing to this new IP
address. This way, since we have a second website under IIS, I can
enable server-side SSL only on this second website.

This worked fine in my test environment, where I don't have a DNS server
running on my Win2K Server system, but when I tried it in the lab with
this other server, I saw the "unexpected" behavior that I described in
my original post.

 

[Steve Duff [MVP]]

There isn't all the information about your network
topology to explain the details, but in general...

1) You can't "override" the server's IP on itself via hosts
or any other mechanism for that matter. The actual resolution
of "foo" internally is 127.0.0.1, which will be translated by
the network stack to (I think) the highest-priority adapter
bound to IP. This is a little more complex with AS and changes
a little in SP4, but in your case it should be the same. You can go
to the advanced properties in network connections and see and
adjust the NIC priority order.

2) Your server is -- I assume -- registering it's adapter
addresses (both of them) via DDNS in the corporate
DNS server. So the corporate DNS can return either
IP to a requester. Which one it actually gives back first
to a workstation depends on the subnet mask ordering and
round-robin settings on that DNS server.

You can use nslookup on a client workstation to see all
the IPs that are returned for "foo" (as well as all the queries --
preprare to be surprised.). Again, you can only adjust adapter
binding order to affect which IP is returned for the localhost name
on the server itself. (It isn't going to go out to a DNS server or
a hosts file to find out what it's own IP is.) And a lot of this really
depends on details unspecified in your post.

3) It is really not appropriate to use DHCP to assign IP
properties for server NICs except in the most unusual of
circumstances (which this isn't) -- even if it is done
by MAC reservation. Servers need hard-wired IP addresses
that are always available (ie before DHCP client lease happens)
and which don't change. I'd strongly recommend fixing that.

5) Multihomed servers are invariably trouble of one sort or another.
Usually trouble that can be dealt with, but trouble nonetheless.
And who in this business needs more troubles?

If you have any way you can run with a single NIC and use external
routing and firewalls to handle your multi-LAN topology, you will simplify your
life greatly.

HTH

Steve Duff, MCSE
Ergodic Systems, Inc.

Hi,

We have a Win2K Advanced Server system, with 2 NICs. Machine name is,
say, "foo".

Originally, only one of the NICs was enabled, and configured to use
DHCP, and it got an IP address something like 10.5.2.208, and it got an
IP address for the DNS server pointing to our corporate DNS server.

With the above, other machines on the corporate network could get to a
website on this machine using a web browser by using http://foo

This server was configured as a root domain controller (i.e., there are
no domain controllers "above" it).

Then, today, we enabled the 2nd NIC, and plugged it into the network.
Again, this 2nd NIC was configured to use DHCP, and it got an IP address
of something like 10.5.3.64.

What I'm puzzled about is:

1) If I'm on this machine "foo", and I "ping foo", the IP address it
shows is the 10.5.3.64.

2) But, if I'm on any other machine on the network, and I "ping foo",
the address it shows is the 10.5.2.208.

In other words, the machine name "foo" appears to resolve to two
different IP addresses, depending upon from which machine the "ping" is
run.

Can someone explain why this is happening?

Thanks in advance!

Jim

[I'm cross-posting this to the DNS NG, as I'm now wondering if this has
something to do with MS DNS...]

Hi,

I've been thinking about this more, and a couple of things that I forgot
to mention in my original post:

The server machine ("foo") happens to have MS DNS Server installed on
it. I think that the reason that this slipped my mind was that when we
used ipconfig, it showed that both NICs had DNS IP addresses (retrieved
via DHCP, I'm guessing) pointing to the corporate DNS server.

We also originally noted a kind of puzzling behavior when trying to
"ping foo" from server "foo": Even if we put an entry in the etc\hosts
file, the ping would not return the IP address in the etc\hosts file.


I'm now wondering if something like the following may be happening:

1) When we originally had only 1 NIC enabled on machine "foo", when we
"ping foo" from machine "foo" itself, the name resolution was being done
by the DNS server on machine "foo", while when we "ping foo" from a
different machine, the name resolution was being done by the corporate
DNS server.

2) When we enabled the 2nd NIC on machine "foo", this somehow causes the
DNS server on machine "foo" to be updated to use the IP address assigned
to the 2nd NIC, but doing a "ping foo" from a different machine still is
using the corporate DNS server for name resolution.


The above would kind of explain what we're actually seeing, but in order
for the above scenario to be correct, this seems to imply that:

1) Enabling the 2nd NIC on machine "foo" causes the DNS server on
machine "foo" to be updated to the IP address of the 2nd NIC, and

2) The "order" of name resolution seems to be such that the DNS server
on machine "foo" is taking priority over both the etc\hosts file and the
DNS server(s) being pointed to in ipconfig.


I'm kind of puzzled about all of this, because I always thought that the
FIRST place name resolution takes place is using the etc\hosts file,
before any DNS server.


Can anyone provide some insight into all of this???

Thanks,
Jim

 

[Ohaya]

Steve,

Thanks for your informative response. I've really got to read it over
more thoroughly, but a couple of comments/questions:

I did all of this as a kind of "bandaid" workaround to help some people
because they had some problems getting their software working (a
SSL/website problem), and had a demo/test coming up.

The "original" plan that I had proposed was to do this with fixed IP
addresses. But, when they actually let me on the system, their network
folks wouldn't provide fixed IP addresses, so I just gave it a shot.
Also, I had originally intended to do this by assigning the 2nd IP
address to the same NIC, rather than using a 2nd (physical) NIC.

I was REALLY surprised when it worked, especially when I found the
things that I noted (the host name resolving to different IP addresses
on the server vs. other machines).

Could you clarify some things re. your comment #2 below:

- If I assigned multiple IP addresses to a single NIC, rather than using
the 2 NICs, it looks like, from my testing, depending on the order that
I Add the IP addresses, when I do a "ping foo" from the machine "foo",
it will return the 1st IP address shown in the Advanced properties. Is
this correct?

- If I did as described above (2 IP addresses on a single NIC), do you
think that they would be able to configure their DNS to point to only
ONE of the IP addresses? I think that you seemed to allude to them
being able to do this when you said that it "depends on the subnet mask
ordering and round-robin settings on that DNS server."? In other words,
can they configure their DNS server to return just ONE of the IP
addresses for machine name "foo"?

Thanks again. This is very interesting !

Jim

There isn't all the information about your network
topology to explain the details, but in general...

1) You can't "override" the server's IP on itself via hosts
or any other mechanism for that matter. The actual resolution
of "foo" internally is 127.0.0.1, which will be translated by
the network stack to (I think) the highest-priority adapter
bound to IP. This is a little more complex with AS and changes
a little in SP4, but in your case it should be the same. You can go
to the advanced properties in network connections and see and
adjust the NIC priority order.

2) Your server is -- I assume -- registering it's adapter
addresses (both of them) via DDNS in the corporate
DNS server. So the corporate DNS can return either
IP to a requester. Which one it actually gives back first
to a workstation depends on the subnet mask ordering and
round-robin settings on that DNS server.

You can use nslookup on a client workstation to see all
the IPs that are returned for "foo" (as well as all the queries --
preprare to be surprised.). Again, you can only adjust adapter
binding order to affect which IP is returned for the localhost name
on the server itself. (It isn't going to go out to a DNS server or
a hosts file to find out what it's own IP is.) And a lot of this really
depends on details unspecified in your post.

3) It is really not appropriate to use DHCP to assign IP
properties for server NICs except in the most unusual of
circumstances (which this isn't) -- even if it is done
by MAC reservation. Servers need hard-wired IP addresses
that are always available (ie before DHCP client lease happens)
and which don't change. I'd strongly recommend fixing that.

5) Multihomed servers are invariably trouble of one sort or another.
Usually trouble that can be dealt with, but trouble nonetheless.
And who in this business needs more troubles?

If you have any way you can run with a single NIC and use external
routing and firewalls to handle your multi-LAN topology, you will simplify your
life greatly.

HTH

Steve Duff, MCSE
Ergodic Systems, Inc.

Hi,

We have a Win2K Advanced Server system, with 2 NICs. Machine name is,
say, "foo".

Originally, only one of the NICs was enabled, and configured to use
DHCP, and it got an IP address something like 10.5.2.208, and it got an
IP address for the DNS server pointing to our corporate DNS server.

With the above, other machines on the corporate network could get to a
website on this machine using a web browser by using http://foo

This server was configured as a root domain controller (i.e., there are
no domain controllers "above" it).

Then, today, we enabled the 2nd NIC, and plugged it into the network.
Again, this 2nd NIC was configured to use DHCP, and it got an IP address
of something like 10.5.3.64.

What I'm puzzled about is:

1) If I'm on this machine "foo", and I "ping foo", the IP address it
shows is the 10.5.3.64.

2) But, if I'm on any other machine on the network, and I "ping foo",
the address it shows is the 10.5.2.208.

In other words, the machine name "foo" appears to resolve to two
different IP addresses, depending upon from which machine the "ping" is
run.

Can someone explain why this is happening?

Thanks in advance!

Jim

[I'm cross-posting this to the DNS NG, as I'm now wondering if this has
something to do with MS DNS...]

Hi,

I've been thinking about this more, and a couple of things that I forgot
to mention in my original post:

The server machine ("foo") happens to have MS DNS Server installed on
it. I think that the reason that this slipped my mind was that when we
used ipconfig, it showed that both NICs had DNS IP addresses (retrieved
via DHCP, I'm guessing) pointing to the corporate DNS server.

We also originally noted a kind of puzzling behavior when trying to
"ping foo" from server "foo": Even if we put an entry in the etc\hosts
file, the ping would not return the IP address in the etc\hosts file.


I'm now wondering if something like the following may be happening:

1) When we originally had only 1 NIC enabled on machine "foo", when we
"ping foo" from machine "foo" itself, the name resolution was being done
by the DNS server on machine "foo", while when we "ping foo" from a
different machine, the name resolution was being done by the corporate
DNS server.

2) When we enabled the 2nd NIC on machine "foo", this somehow causes the
DNS server on machine "foo" to be updated to use the IP address assigned
to the 2nd NIC, but doing a "ping foo" from a different machine still is
using the corporate DNS server for name resolution.


The above would kind of explain what we're actually seeing, but in order
for the above scenario to be correct, this seems to imply that:

1) Enabling the 2nd NIC on machine "foo" causes the DNS server on
machine "foo" to be updated to the IP address of the 2nd NIC, and

2) The "order" of name resolution seems to be such that the DNS server
on machine "foo" is taking priority over both the etc\hosts file and the
DNS server(s) being pointed to in ipconfig.


I'm kind of puzzled about all of this, because I always thought that the
FIRST place name resolution takes place is using the etc\hosts file,
before any DNS server.


Can anyone provide some insight into all of this???

Thanks,
Jim

 

[news.altohiway.com]

Id agree wholeheartedly with Steve the MCP.

Hasten to add that I had same problem on a 2003 server that was my domain
controller - it was defaulting to the wrong IP (it was one for RAS) when
pinged from any other machine.

There is a MS KB that goes on about "multihoming" that explains this kind of
problem I had. I made my server single device (not multihomed, just one LAN
card thereafter) and the problem goes away ... I cannot find the doc however
as I had to reinstall XP and lost my OS partition that I had it on.

I would suggest avoid multihoming If you can, on a domain controller
particularly dont install ras on it either, although its a pretty stupid
place to install it I admit (purely down to lack of servers).

There isn't all the information about your network
topology to explain the details, but in general...

1) You can't "override" the server's IP on itself via hosts
or any other mechanism for that matter. The actual resolution
of "foo" internally is 127.0.0.1, which will be translated by
the network stack to (I think) the highest-priority adapter
bound to IP. This is a little more complex with AS and changes
a little in SP4, but in your case it should be the same. You can go
to the advanced properties in network connections and see and
adjust the NIC priority order.

2) Your server is -- I assume -- registering it's adapter
addresses (both of them) via DDNS in the corporate
DNS server. So the corporate DNS can return either
IP to a requester. Which one it actually gives back first
to a workstation depends on the subnet mask ordering and
round-robin settings on that DNS server.

You can use nslookup on a client workstation to see all
the IPs that are returned for "foo" (as well as all the queries --
preprare to be surprised.). Again, you can only adjust adapter
binding order to affect which IP is returned for the localhost name
on the server itself. (It isn't going to go out to a DNS server or
a hosts file to find out what it's own IP is.) And a lot of this really
depends on details unspecified in your post.

3) It is really not appropriate to use DHCP to assign IP
properties for server NICs except in the most unusual of
circumstances (which this isn't) -- even if it is done
by MAC reservation. Servers need hard-wired IP addresses
that are always available (ie before DHCP client lease happens)
and which don't change. I'd strongly recommend fixing that.

5) Multihomed servers are invariably trouble of one sort or another.
Usually trouble that can be dealt with, but trouble nonetheless.
And who in this business needs more troubles?

If you have any way you can run with a single NIC and use external
routing and firewalls to handle your multi-LAN topology, you will simplify your
life greatly.

HTH

Steve Duff, MCSE
Ergodic Systems, Inc.

Hi,

We have a Win2K Advanced Server system, with 2 NICs. Machine name is,
say, "foo".

Originally, only one of the NICs was enabled, and configured to use
DHCP, and it got an IP address something like 10.5.2.208, and it got an
IP address for the DNS server pointing to our corporate DNS server.

With the above, other machines on the corporate network could get to a
website on this machine using a web browser by using http://foo

This server was configured as a root domain controller (i.e., there are
no domain controllers "above" it).

Then, today, we enabled the 2nd NIC, and plugged it into the network.
Again, this 2nd NIC was configured to use DHCP, and it got an IP address
of something like 10.5.3.64.

What I'm puzzled about is:

1) If I'm on this machine "foo", and I "ping foo", the IP address it
shows is the 10.5.3.64.

2) But, if I'm on any other machine on the network, and I "ping foo",
the address it shows is the 10.5.2.208.

In other words, the machine name "foo" appears to resolve to two
different IP addresses, depending upon from which machine the "ping" is
run.

Can someone explain why this is happening?

Thanks in advance!

Jim

[I'm cross-posting this to the DNS NG, as I'm now wondering if this has
something to do with MS DNS...]

Hi,

I've been thinking about this more, and a couple of things that I forgot
to mention in my original post:

The server machine ("foo") happens to have MS DNS Server installed on
it. I think that the reason that this slipped my mind was that when we
used ipconfig, it showed that both NICs had DNS IP addresses (retrieved
via DHCP, I'm guessing) pointing to the corporate DNS server.

We also originally noted a kind of puzzling behavior when trying to
"ping foo" from server "foo": Even if we put an entry in the etc\hosts
file, the ping would not return the IP address in the etc\hosts file.


I'm now wondering if something like the following may be happening:

1) When we originally had only 1 NIC enabled on machine "foo", when we
"ping foo" from machine "foo" itself, the name resolution was being done
by the DNS server on machine "foo", while when we "ping foo" from a
different machine, the name resolution was being done by the corporate
DNS server.

2) When we enabled the 2nd NIC on machine "foo", this somehow causes the
DNS server on machine "foo" to be updated to use the IP address assigned
to the 2nd NIC, but doing a "ping foo" from a different machine still is
using the corporate DNS server for name resolution.


The above would kind of explain what we're actually seeing, but in order
for the above scenario to be correct, this seems to imply that:

1) Enabling the 2nd NIC on machine "foo" causes the DNS server on
machine "foo" to be updated to the IP address of the 2nd NIC, and

2) The "order" of name resolution seems to be such that the DNS server
on machine "foo" is taking priority over both the etc\hosts file and the
DNS server(s) being pointed to in ipconfig.


I'm kind of puzzled about all of this, because I always thought that the
FIRST place name resolution takes place is using the etc\hosts file,
before any DNS server.


Can anyone provide some insight into all of this???

Thanks,
Jim

 

[Tony]

Id agree wholeheartedly with Steve the MCP.

Hasten to add that I had same problem on a 2003 server that was my domain
controller - it was defaulting to the wrong IP (it was one for RAS) when
pinged from any other machine.

There is a MS KB that goes on about "multihoming" that explains this kind of
problem I had. I made my server single device (not multihomed, just one LAN
card thereafter) and the problem goes away ... I cannot find the doc however
as I had to reinstall XP and lost my OS partition that I had it on.

I would suggest avoid multihoming If you can, on a domain controller
particularly dont install ras on it either, although its a pretty stupid
place to install it I admit (purely down to lack of servers).

There isn't all the information about your network
topology to explain the details, but in general...

1) You can't "override" the server's IP on itself via hosts
or any other mechanism for that matter. The actual resolution
of "foo" internally is 127.0.0.1, which will be translated by
the network stack to (I think) the highest-priority adapter
bound to IP. This is a little more complex with AS and changes
a little in SP4, but in your case it should be the same. You can go
to the advanced properties in network connections and see and
adjust the NIC priority order.

2) Your server is -- I assume -- registering it's adapter
addresses (both of them) via DDNS in the corporate
DNS server. So the corporate DNS can return either
IP to a requester. Which one it actually gives back first
to a workstation depends on the subnet mask ordering and
round-robin settings on that DNS server.

You can use nslookup on a client workstation to see all
the IPs that are returned for "foo" (as well as all the queries --
preprare to be surprised.). Again, you can only adjust adapter
binding order to affect which IP is returned for the localhost name
on the server itself. (It isn't going to go out to a DNS server or
a hosts file to find out what it's own IP is.) And a lot of this really
depends on details unspecified in your post.

3) It is really not appropriate to use DHCP to assign IP
properties for server NICs except in the most unusual of
circumstances (which this isn't) -- even if it is done
by MAC reservation. Servers need hard-wired IP addresses
that are always available (ie before DHCP client lease happens)
and which don't change. I'd strongly recommend fixing that.

5) Multihomed servers are invariably trouble of one sort or another.
Usually trouble that can be dealt with, but trouble nonetheless.
And who in this business needs more troubles?

If you have any way you can run with a single NIC and use external
routing and firewalls to handle your multi-LAN topology, you will simplify your
life greatly.

HTH

Steve Duff, MCSE
Ergodic Systems, Inc.

Hi,

We have a Win2K Advanced Server system, with 2 NICs. Machine name is,
say, "foo".

Originally, only one of the NICs was enabled, and configured to use
DHCP, and it got an IP address something like 10.5.2.208, and it got an
IP address for the DNS server pointing to our corporate DNS server.

With the above, other machines on the corporate network could get to a
website on this machine using a web browser by using http://foo

This server was configured as a root domain controller (i.e., there are
no domain controllers "above" it).

Then, today, we enabled the 2nd NIC, and plugged it into the network.
Again, this 2nd NIC was configured to use DHCP, and it got an IP address
of something like 10.5.3.64.

What I'm puzzled about is:

1) If I'm on this machine "foo", and I "ping foo", the IP address it
shows is the 10.5.3.64.

2) But, if I'm on any other machine on the network, and I "ping foo",
the address it shows is the 10.5.2.208.

In other words, the machine name "foo" appears to resolve to two
different IP addresses, depending upon from which machine the "ping" is
run.

Can someone explain why this is happening?

Thanks in advance!

Jim

[I'm cross-posting this to the DNS NG, as I'm now wondering if this has
something to do with MS DNS...]

Hi,

I've been thinking about this more, and a couple of things that I forgot
to mention in my original post:

The server machine ("foo") happens to have MS DNS Server installed on
it. I think that the reason that this slipped my mind was that when we
used ipconfig, it showed that both NICs had DNS IP addresses (retrieved
via DHCP, I'm guessing) pointing to the corporate DNS server.

We also originally noted a kind of puzzling behavior when trying to
"ping foo" from server "foo": Even if we put an entry in the etc\hosts
file, the ping would not return the IP address in the etc\hosts file.


I'm now wondering if something like the following may be happening:

1) When we originally had only 1 NIC enabled on machine "foo", when we
"ping foo" from machine "foo" itself, the name resolution was being done
by the DNS server on machine "foo", while when we "ping foo" from a
different machine, the name resolution was being done by the corporate
DNS server.

2) When we enabled the 2nd NIC on machine "foo", this somehow causes the
DNS server on machine "foo" to be updated to use the IP address assigned
to the 2nd NIC, but doing a "ping foo" from a different machine still is
using the corporate DNS server for name resolution.


The above would kind of explain what we're actually seeing, but in order
for the above scenario to be correct, this seems to imply that:

1) Enabling the 2nd NIC on machine "foo" causes the DNS server on
machine "foo" to be updated to the IP address of the 2nd NIC, and

2) The "order" of name resolution seems to be such that the DNS server
on machine "foo" is taking priority over both the etc\hosts file and the
DNS server(s) being pointed to in ipconfig.


I'm kind of puzzled about all of this, because I always thought that the
FIRST place name resolution takes place is using the etc\hosts file,
before any DNS server.


Can anyone provide some insight into all of this???

Thanks,
Jim

 

[Ace Fekay [MVP]]

In

Id agree wholeheartedly with Steve the MCP.

<snip>

Plug for Steve: Actually he's a Microsoft MVP (along with his other
certifications).



--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies to the newsgroup so all can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2000, MCSE+I, MCSA, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory