Host Name Search Precedence

Hello all,

What order does a Windows 2003 Server do IP address resolution for a
given host name? For example, there is the "hosts" file and DNS (and
I'm guessing at least one other mechanism). What order does Windows
search for the host name until it finds the IP associated for a given
host name?

The reason I'm asking is because I'm having a strange problem where if I
ping a host without using its fully qualified domain name (e.g. "ping
host" versus "ping host.domain.com") it attempts to ping an IP and
domain name that no longer exists in my network. However, "nslookup"
returns the correct IP address and domain name. I'm trying to determine
where Windows is getting this invalid domain/IP from.

I've checked "%windir%\system32\drivers\etc\hosts" and the DNS servers
and I can't find where the invalid domain is coming from. It must be
something that I did a long time ago and forgot, because it used to be a
valid name up until about November 2004.

Thank you in advance,

--
Sean

CWBLHD

"Fao, Sean" <(E-Mail Removed)-WANT-NO-SPAM> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hello all,
>
> What order does a Windows 2003 Server do IP address resolution for a
> given host name? For example, there is the "hosts" file and DNS (and
> I'm guessing at least one other mechanism). What order does Windows
> search for the host name until it finds the IP associated for a given
> host name?
>
> The reason I'm asking is because I'm having a strange problem where if I
> ping a host without using its fully qualified domain name (e.g. "ping
> host" versus "ping host.domain.com") it attempts to ping an IP and
> domain name that no longer exists in my network. However, "nslookup"
> returns the correct IP address and domain name. I'm trying to determine
> where Windows is getting this invalid domain/IP from.
>
> I've checked "%windir%\system32\drivers\etc\hosts" and the DNS servers
> and I can't find where the invalid domain is coming from. It must be
> something that I did a long time ago and forgot, because it used to be a
> valid name up until about November 2004.
>
> Thank you in advance,
>
> --
> Sean

"Fao, Sean" <(E-Mail Removed)-WANT-NO-SPAM> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> The reason I'm asking is because I'm having a strange problem where if I
> ping a host without using its fully qualified domain name (e.g. "ping
> host" versus "ping host.domain.com") it attempts to ping an IP and
> domain name that no longer exists in my network.

That would be the Netbios Name. It would use the LMHosts file first then
WINS

FQDN pinging uses the Hosts file first then DNS.

--

Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com

Neteng wrote:
> CWBLHD

Can we buy large hard drives? Hehe, thanks; had to look that one up!

For future reference:

C - cache
W - WINS
B - broadcast
L - lmhosts
H - hosts
D - DNS

Thank you very much.

--
Sean

I thought it would check the LMHosts before querying WINS?

"Fao, Sean" <(E-Mail Removed)-WANT-NO-SPAM> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Neteng wrote:
> > CWBLHD
>
> Can we buy large hard drives? Hehe, thanks; had to look that one up!
>
> For future reference:
>
> C - cache
> W - WINS
> B - broadcast
> L - lmhosts
> H - hosts
> D - DNS
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> --
> Sean

LMHOSTS is last. That is why the #pre exists.

"Phillip Windell" wrote:

>
> "Fao, Sean" <(E-Mail Removed)-WANT-NO-SPAM> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > The reason I'm asking is because I'm having a strange problem where if I
> > ping a host without using its fully qualified domain name (e.g. "ping
> > host" versus "ping host.domain.com") it attempts to ping an IP and
> > domain name that no longer exists in my network.
>
> That would be the Netbios Name. It would use the LMHosts file first then
> WINS
>
> FQDN pinging uses the Hosts file first then DNS.
>
> --
>
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>
>

Negative Ghost rider.

Host name resolution:
1 Self
2 cache
3 Hosts file
4 DNS
5 Broadcast
6 DONE

Netbios resolution would be .(H - Node)

1 Self
2 Netbios Cache
3 Wins
4 Broadcast
5 Lmhosts
6 loop to Host name resolution.
"Fao, Sean" wrote:

> Neteng wrote:
> > CWBLHD
>
> Can we buy large hard drives? Hehe, thanks; had to look that one up!
>
> For future reference:
>
> C - cache
> W - WINS
> B - broadcast
> L - lmhosts
> H - hosts
> D - DNS
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> --
> Sean
>

In news:FFA17A2E-CDDE-4CB7-AD3D-(E-Mail Removed),
Manny Borges <(E-Mail Removed)> posted the following:
> LMHOSTS is last. That is why the #pre exists.

And FYI Lmhosts will not be even tried at all if the checkbox "Enable
Lmhosts lookup" is not checked in TCP/IP properties.

--
Todd J Heron, MCSE
Windows Server 2003/2000/NT; CCA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights

The correct order as per microsoft is
1. local host name
2. Hosts file
3. DNS server
4. netbios name cache
5. wins server
6. Broadcast
7. LMHosts file
:}


"Fao, Sean" <(E-Mail Removed)-WANT-NO-SPAM> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hello all,
>
> What order does a Windows 2003 Server do IP address resolution for a
> given host name? For example, there is the "hosts" file and DNS (and
> I'm guessing at least one other mechanism). What order does Windows
> search for the host name until it finds the IP associated for a given
> host name?
>
> The reason I'm asking is because I'm having a strange problem where if I
> ping a host without using its fully qualified domain name (e.g. "ping
> host" versus "ping host.domain.com") it attempts to ping an IP and
> domain name that no longer exists in my network. However, "nslookup"
> returns the correct IP address and domain name. I'm trying to determine
> where Windows is getting this invalid domain/IP from.
>
> I've checked "%windir%\system32\drivers\etc\hosts" and the DNS servers
> and I can't find where the invalid domain is coming from. It must be
> something that I did a long time ago and forgot, because it used to be a
> valid name up until about November 2004.
>
> Thank you in advance,
>
> --
> Sean