1) The router is fine as the default gateway unless you have multiple routers
connected to the server. In this case you will probably want address
resolution to go through a hand-crafted routing table on your server.
2) Having multiple NICs on a server can be problematic. Regard the spine of
your intranet as the switches, everything hangs off that. For security we put
a dedicated firewall in the intranet (gateway and forwarder) so the router is
connected to the outside interface of the firewall. Now we can change ISP or
access technology without worrying about new router firewall capability.
--
Newell White
"somebody" wrote:
> Danny,
> Thanks again. But two more questions for you or anyone in the group that is
> kind enough to reply.
> 1) To be clear, should these workstations also have the gateway pointing to
> the Windows 2003 Server IP address?
> 2) I am more familiar with Small Business Server 2003 and having a
> configuration with dual network cards in the server - one connected to the
> lan side and the other on the wan side. Is this also a standard
> configuration for a regular Windows 2003 Server? If it is then I will make
> that a goal for this network too.
> Thank you!
>
> "Danny Sanders" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> and 63.138.37.3 (presumably dns provided by the ISP).
> >
> > Probably because the previous admin did not understand that the ONLY place
> > on your AD domain that your ISP's DNS server(s) should be listed is as a
> > forwarder.
> >
> > Listing your ISP's DNS server on your AD clients *may* *be* causing the
> > latency you are experiencing.
> >
> > List ONLY the AD server on your AD clients. This is assuming the AD
> > server has DNS installed on it. List the same DNS server as alternate
> > rather than listing your ISP's DNS server as alternate. For Internet
> > access list your ISP's DNS server(s) as forwarders.
> >
> > hth
> > DDS
> > "somebody" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:QBvvh.4396$Pk5.3080@trndny04...
> >> Danny,
> >> Thanks for your prompt reply.
> >> Router is on 192.168.5.1
> >> Server is on 192.168.5.3
> >> DNS is 192.168.5.3 (the Windows 2003 Server)
> >> and 63.138.37.3 (presumably dns provided by the ISP).
> >> I am guessing that the person that set up this network did that as a fall
> >> back so that the workstations could get to the internet in the event that
> >> the Server was out of commission. Do you think that is the case? Do you
> >> think this is the cause of the latency issues I mentioned?
> >> Thank you!
> >>
> >> "Danny Sanders" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >> news:O8THlz$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >>>> Should the only DNS information be the IP address of the Server?
> >>>
> >>> On an AD domain the clients must point to the DNS server set up for the
> >>> AD domain ONLY.
> >>>
> >>> If I set
> >>>> the DNS to only include the Server would that speed up the latency
> >>>> issue? I wonder if perhaps the two DNS numbers were provided as a fall
> >>>> back to get to the internet should the server ever go down.
> >>>
> >>> What is the second DNS IP address?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> hth
> >>> DDS
> >>> "somebody" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >>> news:92vvh.2236$Xf4.556@trndny09...
> >>>>I have just inherited a Windows 2003 Server with Cisco Router.
> >>>> The router is the DHCP server and is providing both the IP address for
> >>>> the Server plus another address for the DNS information. Everything
> >>>> works but I have noticed slow latency for the first page to appear in a
> >>>> web browser. Should the only DNS information be the IP address of the
> >>>> Server? If I set the DNS to only include the Server would that speed
> >>>> up the latency issue? I wonder if perhaps the two DNS numbers were
> >>>> provided as a fall back to get to the internet should the server ever
> >>>> go down.
> >>>> Any insight appreciated!
> >>>> Thank you.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
|
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
