windows 2003 ras stops responding

I have two windows VPN servers one is 2000 and the other is 2003.
They are setup the same except for having different addresses. There are
internal and external NIC cards. The internal card provides DHCP to the
connecting VPN clients. The clients only use PPTP.
The 2000 VPN RAS server works fine.
The 2003 VPN RAS server works for a day or two and then requires reboot to
get the external NIC card to respond. This is the second 2003 box I have
attempted to get RAS working consistently and I have switched all network
cards. I keep running into the same issue. The external NIC card works for a
while but then stops responding after a day or so. There are no errors in the
logs and there is no firewall in front of the 2003 RAS server. I wanted to
get it to work first. I even attempted to open it to all traffic in the
Inbound filters.
There is no other software running on the boxes except Terminal Services. To
get the 2003 box to except connections again, I VPN in to the 2000 box,
remote desk top to the 2003 box and reboot.
I have seen a lot of similar issues on the web, but no solutions.
Any help is appreciated.

"FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:32298D51-4987-403B-9DD4-(E-Mail Removed)...
>I have two windows VPN servers one is 2000 and the other is 2003.
> They are setup the same except for having different addresses. There are
> internal and external NIC cards. The internal card provides DHCP to the
> connecting VPN clients. The clients only use PPTP.
> The 2000 VPN RAS server works fine.
> The 2003 VPN RAS server works for a day or two and then requires reboot to
> get the external NIC card to respond. This is the second 2003 box I have
> attempted to get RAS working consistently and I have switched all network
> cards. I keep running into the same issue. The external NIC card works
> for a
> while but then stops responding after a day or so. There are no errors in
> the
> logs and there is no firewall in front of the 2003 RAS server. I wanted to
> get it to work first. I even attempted to open it to all traffic in the
> Inbound filters.
> There is no other software running on the boxes except Terminal Services.
> To
> get the 2003 box to except connections again, I VPN in to the 2000 box,
> remote desk top to the 2003 box and reboot.
> I have seen a lot of similar issues on the web, but no solutions.
> Any help is appreciated.
>


Is the external card connected to an ADSL router that shuts off after lack
of activity? If so, I remember this is related to a known issue. Otherwise,
if you have multiple gateways, meaning a gateway on each NIC, that can cause
a problem as well. If this is a DC, that complicates matters. DCs shouldn't
be multihomed nor RRAS installed on one, unless it is an SBS server, due to
the multiple problems that arise with DNS registration.

--
Ace

This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties or guarantees and
confers no rights.

Please reply back to the newsgroup or forum to benefit from collaboration
among responding engineers, and to help others benefit from your resolution.

Ace Fekay, MCT, MCSE, MCSA 2003 & 2000, MCSA Messaging
Microsoft Certified Trainer
(E-Mail Removed)
http://twitter.com/acefekay

For urgent issues, you may want to contact Microsoft PSS directly. Please
check http://support.microsoft.com for regional support phone numbers.

ACE,
Thanks for the reply.
The outside NIC is live on a Cisco router. The win 2000 RAS/VNP server is
setup the same way on the same router without any disconnects. It only
happens on the win 2003 RAS/VPN. Both severs are not running anything but RAS
and terminal services. ( no DNS,AD,mail...nothing)
There is the gateway on both NIC's which I am not sure of. Both machines
(2000 & 2003) have the inside NIC with the inside gateway, the outside NIC
has the outside gateway. I do get the warning about multiple gateways, but
the 2000 box works. What should the default gateways be set to?
If I cannot get the 2003 box to work, I think I am going to roll it back to
2000. I have spent a bit of time on this. I thought 2003 would be an easy
upgrade.


"Ace Fekay [MCT]" wrote:

> "FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:32298D51-4987-403B-9DD4-(E-Mail Removed)...
> >I have two windows VPN servers one is 2000 and the other is 2003.
> > They are setup the same except for having different addresses. There are
> > internal and external NIC cards. The internal card provides DHCP to the
> > connecting VPN clients. The clients only use PPTP.
> > The 2000 VPN RAS server works fine.
> > The 2003 VPN RAS server works for a day or two and then requires reboot to
> > get the external NIC card to respond. This is the second 2003 box I have
> > attempted to get RAS working consistently and I have switched all network
> > cards. I keep running into the same issue. The external NIC card works
> > for a
> > while but then stops responding after a day or so. There are no errors in
> > the
> > logs and there is no firewall in front of the 2003 RAS server. I wanted to
> > get it to work first. I even attempted to open it to all traffic in the
> > Inbound filters.
> > There is no other software running on the boxes except Terminal Services.
> > To
> > get the 2003 box to except connections again, I VPN in to the 2000 box,
> > remote desk top to the 2003 box and reboot.
> > I have seen a lot of similar issues on the web, but no solutions.
> > Any help is appreciated.
> >
>
>
> Is the external card connected to an ADSL router that shuts off after lack
> of activity? If so, I remember this is related to a known issue. Otherwise,
> if you have multiple gateways, meaning a gateway on each NIC, that can cause
> a problem as well. If this is a DC, that complicates matters. DCs shouldn't
> be multihomed nor RRAS installed on one, unless it is an SBS server, due to
> the multiple problems that arise with DNS registration.
>
> --
> Ace
>
> This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties or guarantees and
> confers no rights.
>
> Please reply back to the newsgroup or forum to benefit from collaboration
> among responding engineers, and to help others benefit from your resolution.
>
> Ace Fekay, MCT, MCSE, MCSA 2003 & 2000, MCSA Messaging
> Microsoft Certified Trainer
> (E-Mail Removed)
> http://twitter.com/acefekay
>
> For urgent issues, you may want to contact Microsoft PSS directly. Please
> check http://support.microsoft.com for regional support phone numbers.
>
>

"FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news2615F04-0133-4009-962C-(E-Mail Removed)...
> ACE,
> Thanks for the reply.
> The outside NIC is live on a Cisco router. The win 2000 RAS/VNP server is
> setup the same way on the same router without any disconnects. It only
> happens on the win 2003 RAS/VPN. Both severs are not running anything but
> RAS
> and terminal services. ( no DNS,AD,mail...nothing)
> There is the gateway on both NIC's which I am not sure of. Both machines
> (2000 & 2003) have the inside NIC with the inside gateway, the outside NIC
> has the outside gateway. I do get the warning about multiple gateways, but
> the 2000 box works. What should the default gateways be set to?
> If I cannot get the 2003 box to work, I think I am going to roll it back
> to
> 2000. I have spent a bit of time on this. I thought 2003 would be an easy
> upgrade.
>

Good they're not DCs.

I've seen multiple gateways cause similar and other issues. Remove the
gateway for the internal interface. Move the internal interface to the top
of the binding order (Network services, Advanced Menu, Advanced settings).
This should be done on both 2000 & 2003 servers, or any other servers. There
can only be one gateway, or "doorway to the world," so to speak.

Ace

"Ace Fekay [MCT]" wrote:

> "FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news2615F04-0133-4009-962C-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > ACE,
> > Thanks for the reply.
> > The outside NIC is live on a Cisco router. The win 2000 RAS/VNP server is
> > setup the same way on the same router without any disconnects. It only
> > happens on the win 2003 RAS/VPN. Both severs are not running anything but
> > RAS
> > and terminal services. ( no DNS,AD,mail...nothing)
> > There is the gateway on both NIC's which I am not sure of. Both machines
> > (2000 & 2003) have the inside NIC with the inside gateway, the outside NIC
> > has the outside gateway. I do get the warning about multiple gateways, but
> > the 2000 box works. What should the default gateways be set to?
> > If I cannot get the 2003 box to work, I think I am going to roll it back
> > to
> > 2000. I have spent a bit of time on this. I thought 2003 would be an easy
> > upgrade.
> >
>
> Good they're not DCs.
>
> I've seen multiple gateways cause similar and other issues. Remove the
> gateway for the internal interface. Move the internal interface to the top
> of the binding order (Network services, Advanced Menu, Advanced settings).
> This should be done on both 2000 & 2003 servers, or any other servers. There
> can only be one gateway, or "doorway to the world," so to speak.
>
> Ace
>
Thanks Ace
I will do that. I rolled it back to windows 2000 due to time issues and I
needed it to be on line ASAP. I will fix the Gateway issue too. Although it
appears to work OK on the 2000 box just the way it is. I have the first 2003
box I tried to get to work. I will bring it back on line and try the gateway
fix too with different addreses.

Thanks again
>
>

"FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:983C627A-5BB9-48AB-96E3-(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> Thanks Ace
> I will do that. I rolled it back to windows 2000 due to time issues and I
> needed it to be on line ASAP. I will fix the Gateway issue too. Although it
> appears to work OK on the 2000 box just the way it is. I have the first 2003
> box I tried to get to work. I will bring it back on line and try the gateway
> fix too with different addreses.
>
> Thanks again


You are welcome. Let me know how you make out.

Ace

"Ace Fekay [MCT]" wrote:

> "FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:983C627A-5BB9-48AB-96E3-(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> > Thanks Ace
> > I will do that. I rolled it back to windows 2000 due to time issues and I
> > needed it to be on line ASAP. I will fix the Gateway issue too. Although it
> > appears to work OK on the 2000 box just the way it is. I have the first 2003
> > box I tried to get to work. I will bring it back on line and try the gateway
> > fix too with different addreses.
> >
> > Thanks again
>
>
> You are welcome. Let me know how you make out.
>
> Ace

I should be able to test the 2003 server in a couple of weeks.
I'll let you know how I do with it.

KJG
>

"FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:7E96B423-638A-4BC2-B063-(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
> "Ace Fekay [MCT]" wrote:
>
>> "FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:983C627A-5BB9-48AB-96E3-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >
>> > Thanks Ace
>> > I will do that. I rolled it back to windows 2000 due to time issues and
>> > I
>> > needed it to be on line ASAP. I will fix the Gateway issue too.
>> > Although it
>> > appears to work OK on the 2000 box just the way it is. I have the first
>> > 2003
>> > box I tried to get to work. I will bring it back on line and try the
>> > gateway
>> > fix too with different addreses.
>> >
>> > Thanks again
>>
>>
>> You are welcome. Let me know how you make out.
>>
>> Ace
>
> I should be able to test the 2003 server in a couple of weeks.
> I'll let you know how I do with it.
>
> KJG
>>


Sounds good!

Ace

"Ace Fekay [MCT]" wrote:

> "FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:7E96B423-638A-4BC2-B063-(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> >
> > "Ace Fekay [MCT]" wrote:
> >
> >> "FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >> news:983C627A-5BB9-48AB-96E3-(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> >
> >> > Thanks Ace
> >> > I will do that. I rolled it back to windows 2000 due to time issues and
> >> > I
> >> > needed it to be on line ASAP. I will fix the Gateway issue too.
> >> > Although it
> >> > appears to work OK on the 2000 box just the way it is. I have the first
> >> > 2003
> >> > box I tried to get to work. I will bring it back on line and try the
> >> > gateway
> >> > fix too with different addreses.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks again
> >>
> >>
> >> You are welcome. Let me know how you make out.
> >>
> >> Ace
> >
> > I should be able to test the 2003 server in a couple of weeks.
> > I'll let you know how I do with it.
> >
> > KJG
> >>
>
>
> Sounds good!
>
> Ace
>
>
Ace,
I re-setup the 2003 VPN server with the gateway and advance network settings
you recommended. It has been working for three days without any issue. This
longer than any other time, so I figure it is going to work. I will test it
for another week before I move it into production and retire the Win 2K box.
I will only post again if it starts failing again, but I have a good feeling
about this. I appreciate the help.
Thanks again,

"FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:5893D0B6-7B06-42ED-BAF5-(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
> "Ace Fekay [MCT]" wrote:
>
>> "FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:7E96B423-638A-4BC2-B063-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >
>> >
>> > "Ace Fekay [MCT]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> "FusionWing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> >> news:983C627A-5BB9-48AB-96E3-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks Ace
>> >> > I will do that. I rolled it back to windows 2000 due to time issues
>> >> > and
>> >> > I
>> >> > needed it to be on line ASAP. I will fix the Gateway issue too.
>> >> > Although it
>> >> > appears to work OK on the 2000 box just the way it is. I have the
>> >> > first
>> >> > 2003
>> >> > box I tried to get to work. I will bring it back on line and try the
>> >> > gateway
>> >> > fix too with different addreses.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks again
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> You are welcome. Let me know how you make out.
>> >>
>> >> Ace
>> >
>> > I should be able to test the 2003 server in a couple of weeks.
>> > I'll let you know how I do with it.
>> >
>> > KJG
>> >>
>>
>>
>> Sounds good!
>>
>> Ace
>>
>>
> Ace,
> I re-setup the 2003 VPN server with the gateway and advance network
> settings
> you recommended. It has been working for three days without any issue.
> This
> longer than any other time, so I figure it is going to work. I will test
> it
> for another week before I move it into production and retire the Win 2K
> box.
> I will only post again if it starts failing again, but I have a good
> feeling
> about this. I appreciate the help.
> Thanks again,
>



I have faith that it will continue to work! :-)

Post back if something goes wrong...

Ace