Making multihomed browsing work

[mike.james]

This follows on from a question that I asked about the internal RAS device.

I'm using a Windows 2003 server as PDC and router.
This makes it multi-homed - but in a trivial sort of way.

I've been trying to make network browsing work properly for some time.

I've followed all the recommendations in the documentation - except for the
"don't do it"
advice which I consider an admission of defeat - this configuration isn't so
difficult or
uncommon.

The problem seemed to come down to the internal RAS IP registering itself as
an IP of the PDC.
Finally I hit on adding static records to the WINS for the PDC, the domain,
the browse master etc.
This seems to work.
The event log reveals that the RAS IP tries to modify the records but can't.

I thought this was a complete solution but after running perfectly for two
or three days suddenly it stops
working. The network isn't browsable and BrowCon says it cant find the
PDC/Doman master browser.
Browstat says that it can't retrieve the list from the master browser.

No matter what I do I can't make the browsing work - restart all relevant
services WinS, DNS, computer browser but nothing
makes it work - but it works again perfectly after rebooting the PDC.
Any thoughts?
mikej

 

[Guest]

Just guessing here but since the problem resolves when you reboot, seems like
its a browser role issue, where the RAS becomes that master browser for
awhile but then the role is taken over by some other machine on your network.

I had a similar issue with NT and XP machines on my network. With the
Computer Browser service running on the XP machines, they would take over the
role of master browser from the NT machine, which was also multi-homed. After
I disabled Computer Browser service on all my XP machines I was able to
browse again.

Also, I found this that might help.:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q135404/

 

[BP]

You can force the DC to be master browser in registry HKLM\
system\\current control set\services\browser\ parameters
IsDomainMaster = TRUE
MaintainServeerLisy = Yes

 

[mike.james]

--
Please note our change of email address. All addresses of the form
(e-mail address removed) should be changed to (e-mail address removed)

Just guessing here but since the problem resolves when you reboot, seems
like
its a browser role issue, where the RAS becomes that master browser for
awhile but then the role is taken over by some other machine on your
network.

This seems very reasonable.
I'm looking into it now but ... browstat still reports the PDC as the master
domain browser when the problem occurs.
I'll see if I can find out who is the browse master by other methods.
mikej

 

[mike.james]

You can force the DC to be master browser in registry HKLM\
system\\current control set\services\browser\ parameters
IsDomainMaster = TRUE
MaintainServeerLisy = Yes

I've already set these two keys on the PDC but after your sensible
suggestion I went and checked that I really had set them.

mikej

 

[Scott Harding]

Why do think this is a "trivial sort of way"? This is exactly what a
multihomed broswer is, nothing trivial about it, you cannot make it work
consistently. Ain't gonna happen. Netbios can only bind to one interface at
a time and it will randomly switch. I have never seen this ever work
consistenly. MS doesn't support it because it doesn't work. You can play
with it all day long but this is not going to be consistent especially with
RAS.

 

[BP]

In past situations I have set unbind statements on specific NetBT_miniport
vlans under the browser registry key when trunking with 802dot1q at
the server Nic level. There is a Q article that describes how to stop the
browser from binding to specific NetBT's for NT4.0 Nics, not sure if the
same value is recognized under Win2k browser registry key.
Article 135404 references the unbind statement I mention.

 

[mike.james]

--
Please note our change of email address. All addresses of the form
(e-mail address removed) should be changed to (e-mail address removed)

Why do think this is a "trivial sort of way"? This is exactly what a
multihomed broswer is, nothing trivial about it, you cannot make it work
consistently. Ain't gonna happen. Netbios can only bind to one interface
at a time and it will randomly switch. I have never seen this ever work
consistenly. MS doesn't support it because it doesn't work. You can play
with it all day long but this is not going to be consistent especially
with RAS.

Then so much shame on Microsoft for creating such a crap network browser
protocol
- SMB is truely the worse piece of design since ...

The server might be multihomed by definition but it isn't an uncommon
configuration and
for that SMB based network browsing to not work is just pathetic. The other
network that the
machine is connected to is the Internet via NATand no one is asking the
browser to maintain
a global server list. It isn't an unreasonable request to expect the netbios
over TCP browse service to
cope with this.

Microsoft don't say it doesn't work - they just say it isn't recommended -
perhaps they should be as clear
about things as you are.

mikej

 

[Phillip Windell]

Then so much shame on Microsoft for creating such a crap network browser
protocol
- SMB is truely the worse piece of design since ...

It does exactly what it was meant to do.

The server might be multihomed by definition but it isn't an uncommon
configuration and

Common doesn't mean "correct". There are all kinds of wrong ways to do
things that are "common",...a multi-homed DC being used as a "router" is a
prime example of that. Most "multi-nic" server setups are a cop-out or a
band-ade for improperly designed networks.

I guess you could use Linux/Unix,...hmm..but wait,..they don't have any
native "browsing" ability at all until they started improving the Samba/SMB
features so they could work with Windows systems.

 

[mike.james]

It does exactly what it was meant to do.

And that's defined where exactly?

Common doesn't mean "correct".

In the programming world it does.
If I create a program that doesn't work in a common configuration it doesn't
last long.

There are all kinds of wrong ways to do
things that are "common",...a multi-homed DC being used as a "router" is a
prime example of that.
Why?

I guess you could use Linux/Unix,...hmm..but wait,..they don't have any
native "browsing" ability at all until they started improving the
Samba/SMB
features so they could work with Windows systems.

Actually the Samba implementation of SMB does work in this configuration.
mikej

 

[Phillip Windell]

In the programming world it does.
If I create a program that doesn't work in a common configuration it doesn't
last long.

This isn't the programming world. This is the networking world. Two
different planets,...that are often at war with one another.

Why?

72294 - Active Directory Communication Fails on Multihomed Domain
Controllers
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;272294

191611 - Symptoms of Multihomed Browsers
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;191611

 

[mike.james]

This isn't the programming world. This is the networking world. Two
different planets,...that are often at war with one another.

Well that might be why we have such useless products - this isn't how a
market economy is supposed to work.

72294 - Active Directory Communication Fails on Multihomed Domain
Controllers
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;272294

191611 - Symptoms of Multihomed Browsers
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;191611

No you've just given me two examples of how Microsoft technology falls over
in this situation.
If it didn't fall over - and it certainly doesn't have to if it was
implemented PROPERLY -
then there would be no case to make against the multi-homed DC that found
itself so
just because it was also working as a router and happened to have a modem
plugged in.

There is nothing inherently wrong with this configuration - except that
Microsoft can't be
bothered to make some of its old technology work on it.
After all there really isn't any reason for the browsing to work the way it
does.
Why doesn't it make use of the Active Directory for example?
You can claim that if it isn't broke don't fix it but in this case, judging
by the number of
questions that turn up on Google - it is very much broke and does need a
fix.
mikej