Host File being ignored

All,

I've set up a Windows 2003 Server as a Veritas backup server and it has two
NICs, a primary NIC (10.10.1.33/16) for the production network, configured
with a gateway and DNS Servers, and a Backup NIC (10.110.1.33/16) for the
isolated Backup switch with no gateway and no DNS servers configured.

I set up the host file to see the servers that are attached to the backup
switch through the Backup NIC, like such:

10.110.183.2 unixserver.austincollege.edu

But whenever the primary NIC has the DNS Server entries this host file never
gets looked at. I've proven this by running the following commands on the
server:

ipconfig /displaydns (Verify that what is in cache locally is what the DNS
server see unixserver.austincollege.edu as)

ipconfig /flushdns (Ran this then re-ran ipconfig /displaydns and there were
no records in cache for unixserver.austincollege.edu), but the host file is
supposed to be automatically cached in Windows 2003.

net stop dnscache && net start dnscache thinking I would somehow jolt DNS
into loading the host file.

If I pull the DNS server entries out of the primary NIC I can ping
unixserver.austincollege.edu on 10.110.1.33 all day long.

Last note, the primary NIC has a metric of 1 and the Backup NIC has a metric
of 20.

--
Regards,

Patrick Boren


a-pabore

Forget fooling with Host files and create the entry manually in the DNS
Server.

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

"a-pabore" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:EDEA5FA1-9D1B-410C-9BEC-(E-Mail Removed)...
> All,
>
> I've set up a Windows 2003 Server as a Veritas backup server and it has
> two
> NICs, a primary NIC (10.10.1.33/16) for the production network, configured
> with a gateway and DNS Servers, and a Backup NIC (10.110.1.33/16) for the
> isolated Backup switch with no gateway and no DNS servers configured.
>
> I set up the host file to see the servers that are attached to the backup
> switch through the Backup NIC, like such:
>
> 10.110.183.2 unixserver.austincollege.edu
>
> But whenever the primary NIC has the DNS Server entries this host file
> never
> gets looked at. I've proven this by running the following commands on the
> server:
>
> ipconfig /displaydns (Verify that what is in cache locally is what the DNS
> server see unixserver.austincollege.edu as)
>
> ipconfig /flushdns (Ran this then re-ran ipconfig /displaydns and there
> were
> no records in cache for unixserver.austincollege.edu), but the host file
> is
> supposed to be automatically cached in Windows 2003.
>
> net stop dnscache && net start dnscache thinking I would somehow jolt DNS
> into loading the host file.
>
> If I pull the DNS server entries out of the primary NIC I can ping
> unixserver.austincollege.edu on 10.110.1.33 all day long.
>
> Last note, the primary NIC has a metric of 1 and the Backup NIC has a
> metric
> of 20.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Patrick Boren

Phillip,

The primary NIC is already registered in DNS for each of the production
servers. So unixserver.austincollege.edu already has an IP address listed as
10.10.183.12. I not sure it would be prudent to have two A records for the
same name with two separate IP addresses. I am setting up a backup switch
that is isolated. For those servers that are connected to the backup switch
I want the backup server to back those up across this backup switch.

If I enter the second IP address manually in DNS then those servers/clients
that are not connected to the backup network will no longer be able to
communicate with the production servers if they are given the backup network
IP address since this network is completely isolated from the rest of the
network.
--
Regards,

Patrick Boren


"Phillip Windell" wrote:

> Forget fooling with Host files and create the entry manually in the DNS
> Server.
>
> --
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
> "a-pabore" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:EDEA5FA1-9D1B-410C-9BEC-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > All,
> >
> > I've set up a Windows 2003 Server as a Veritas backup server and it has
> > two
> > NICs, a primary NIC (10.10.1.33/16) for the production network, configured
> > with a gateway and DNS Servers, and a Backup NIC (10.110.1.33/16) for the
> > isolated Backup switch with no gateway and no DNS servers configured.
> >
> > I set up the host file to see the servers that are attached to the backup
> > switch through the Backup NIC, like such:
> >
> > 10.110.183.2 unixserver.austincollege.edu
> >
> > But whenever the primary NIC has the DNS Server entries this host file
> > never
> > gets looked at. I've proven this by running the following commands on the
> > server:
> >
> > ipconfig /displaydns (Verify that what is in cache locally is what the DNS
> > server see unixserver.austincollege.edu as)
> >
> > ipconfig /flushdns (Ran this then re-ran ipconfig /displaydns and there
> > were
> > no records in cache for unixserver.austincollege.edu), but the host file
> > is
> > supposed to be automatically cached in Windows 2003.
> >
> > net stop dnscache && net start dnscache thinking I would somehow jolt DNS
> > into loading the host file.
> >
> > If I pull the DNS server entries out of the primary NIC I can ping
> > unixserver.austincollege.edu on 10.110.1.33 all day long.
> >
> > Last note, the primary NIC has a metric of 1 and the Backup NIC has a
> > metric
> > of 20.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> >
> > Patrick Boren
>
>
>

"a-pabore" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:E881D7B9-173E-4DDA-97BE-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Phillip,
>
> The primary NIC is already registered in DNS for each of the production
> servers. So unixserver.austincollege.edu already has an IP address listed
> as
> 10.10.183.12. I not sure it would be prudent to have two A records for
> the

Then create a fake name or something,...then use that name during the
backup.

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

Phillip,

Now that's an interesting idea. Of course it will create a lot of work, but
at least it could work. Thanks.
--
Regards,

Patrick Boren


"Phillip Windell" wrote:

> "a-pabore" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:E881D7B9-173E-4DDA-97BE-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Phillip,
> >
> > The primary NIC is already registered in DNS for each of the production
> > servers. So unixserver.austincollege.edu already has an IP address listed
> > as
> > 10.10.183.12. I not sure it would be prudent to have two A records for
> > the
>
> Then create a fake name or something,...then use that name during the
> backup.
>
> --
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>
>

Phillip,

An old friend of mine asked me to rename the hosts file and create a new one
then restart the DNS Client Service.... and sure enough! It is working as
advertised. The host file should automagically be cached that's why I
couldn't figure this one out. Client and Server both resolve names in the
following order:

Local cache
Hosts file (which is supposed to be cached locally)
DNS Server(s)

Your idea had merit though, it would have worked, but would have been a load
of work.
--
Thanks,

Patrick Boren


"Phillip Windell" wrote:

> "a-pabore" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:E881D7B9-173E-4DDA-97BE-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Phillip,
> >
> > The primary NIC is already registered in DNS for each of the production
> > servers. So unixserver.austincollege.edu already has an IP address listed
> > as
> > 10.10.183.12. I not sure it would be prudent to have two A records for
> > the
>
> Then create a fake name or something,...then use that name during the
> backup.
>
> --
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>
>

"a-pabore" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:617A12C8-A80C-43CD-80D9-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Your idea had merit though, it would have worked, but would have been a
> load
> of work.

It would have taken 15 seconds (on a slow machine) in the DNS Server's
Config to create a Record. Then the name & IP pair would then be globablly
reconized by any machine using that DNS for resolution.
It is no different than manually adding a Unix machine that doesn't
automatically regeister itself in the Windows AD based DNS.

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

Phillip,

Yeah I know, that's why I said your idea had merit, but it is better for the
operating system to perform as expected. Since the hosts file was the
original problem, in that it was not being cached locally as it is supposed
to be, this was the crux of my problem. I am always open to alternative
solutions. Your solution was an alternative solution that had merit, but
since the Microsoft EPS Networking Technical Lead came up with the solution
to the hosts file problem, I ran with that as the primary solution.

--
Regards,

Patrick Boren


"Phillip Windell" wrote:

> "a-pabore" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:617A12C8-A80C-43CD-80D9-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Your idea had merit though, it would have worked, but would have been a
> > load
> > of work.
>
> It would have taken 15 seconds (on a slow machine) in the DNS Server's
> Config to create a Record. Then the name & IP pair would then be globablly
> reconized by any machine using that DNS for resolution.
> It is no different than manually adding a Unix machine that doesn't
> automatically regeister itself in the Windows AD based DNS.
>
> --
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>
>
>

"a-pabore" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:86526E70-26B5-4B0E-977B-(E-Mail Removed)...

> Yeah I know, that's why I said your idea had merit, but it is better for
> the
> operating system to perform as expected.

DNS is the "expected" way it is to be performed. The hosts file is not.
Host files are a thing of the past and are rarely used and pretty much
unmanageable in a larger context.

> since the Microsoft EPS Networking Technical Lead came up with the
> solution
> to the hosts file problem, I ran with that as the primary solution.

Hosts files are always the "alternate" solution and are the exception to the
rule. The normal solution and the normal "rule" is to use DNS.

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

Hosts file is NOT cached. LMhosts file is cached