MS DNS VS Unix Bind

[bredskin]

I am currently working in a MS environment with 4000 xp
and nt clients. We recently migrated from NT to a 2000
Active Directory integrated environment. Our Domain
Controllers are using each other as a DNS source; however,
all of our clients are pointing to a non-dynamic Unix DNS
server. What are the advantages and disadvantages of
moving to a dynamic Microsoft DNS solution.

 

[Kevin D. Goodknecht Sr. [MVP]]

In

I am currently working in a MS environment with 4000 xp
and nt clients. We recently migrated from NT to a 2000
Active Directory integrated environment. Our Domain
Controllers are using each other as a DNS source; however,
all of our clients are pointing to a non-dynamic Unix DNS
server. What are the advantages and disadvantages of
moving to a dynamic Microsoft DNS solution.

Clients are not required to register in DNS, so you can point the clients to
a non-dynamic DNS but, ONLY if the non-dynamic DNS has a copy of the AD DNS
zone or IF the non-dynamic DNS has the AD sub folders delegated to the AD
DNS server.

The advantage to using dynamic DNS on your clients are if they have shared
resources, then the clients can be located in DNS for their shared resouces.
The advantage to using the MS DNS is that if your clients are going to
register in DNS, you can use only secure updates on an AD integrated zone,
which makes the zone more secure on MS DNS.

Your clients can't make secure updates on the BIND DNS, secure updates to a
BIND DNS must be made from a BIND DHCP server. Just having DHCP register in
DNS, you can lose some security because any client that can get an address
from DHCP can be registered in DNS then.