search for: retrohack

On 11/03/15 18:01, James wrote: > Bob, > > Take a look at the following two links. > > http://retrohack.com/a-word-or-two-about-dns-islanding/ > > http://blogs.technet.com/b/askds/archive/2010/07/17/friday-mail-sack-saturday-edition.aspx#dnsbest > > I have more than two DC's but generally I would have each one point at > the other. > > I tried that, pointing each DC to the o...

a nice example about dns islanding. http://retrohack.com/a-word-or-two-about-dns-islanding/ and with only 2 dc's setup the resolv.confs like : DC01 Primary DNS 10.1.1.2 Secondary DNS 127.0.0.1 DC02 Primary DNS 10.1.1.1 Secondary DNS 127.0.0.1 http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff807362%28v=ws.10%29.aspx says: If the loopback...

When running two DC's is the recommended practice for the first DC to resolve to itself, like this: first DC /etc/resolv.conf file: search samdom.tld nameserver [DC1 ip address] nameserver 127.0.0.1 And on second DC to both DC1 and DC2, like this: search samdom.tld nameserver [DC1 ip address] nameserver [DC2 ip address] nameserver 127.0.0.1 Or is the incorrect? --

It now happened for the second time: Out of the blue, I could not login from windows machines or authenticate using smbclient, while Kerberos/nslcd were still working fine, after setting a password. The cause is that the password change didn' reach both AD DCs, but only one. The other one still had the old value as could be seen by samba-tool ldapcmp. Restarting the DCs and waiting for a

...ot find any way reproducible under arbitrary conditions. > Just an idea: AD problems are often caused by DNS problems and we got > the keyword "DNS islanding" in an other threat at the moment: Which DNS > do your DCs use as primary? Their own or a different one? See > http://retrohack.com/a-word-or-two-about-dns-islanding/ As I understood Linux resolving there is no static primary-secondary concept for DNS. So I'll try to remove the self-dependence altogether and see, if it enhances the situation. Regards, - lars.

So in my ears it makes sense to add this to the wiki for joining a domain as a DC. I will add it soon. Am 12. M?rz 2015 11:00:21 MEZ, schrieb "L.P.H. van Belle" <belle at bazuin.nl>: > >a nice example about dns islanding. > >http://retrohack.com/a-word-or-two-about-dns-islanding/ > > >and with only 2 dc's >setup the resolv.confs like : > >DC01 >Primary DNS 10.1.1.2 >Secondary DNS 127.0.0.1 > >DC02 >Primary DNS 10.1.1.1 >Secondary DNS 127.0.0.1 > >http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/lib...

...sion are you running? * How many DCs? * Can you force this problem to appear? Just an idea: AD problems are often caused by DNS problems and we got the keyword "DNS islanding" in an other threat at the moment: Which DNS do your DCs use as primary? Their own or a different one? See http://retrohack.com/a-word-or-two-about-dns-islanding/ Regards, Marc

...add this to the wiki for >> joining a domain as a DC. I will add it soon. Am 12. M?rz >2015 >> 11:00:21 MEZ, schrieb "L.P.H. van Belle" <belle at bazuin.nl>: >> >> a nice example about dns islanding. >> http://retrohack.com/a-word-or-two-about-dns-islanding/ >> and with only 2 dc's setup the resolv.confs like : DC01 >> Primary DNS 10.1.1.2 <http://10.1.1.2> Secondary DNS >> 127.0.0.1 <http://127.0.0.1> DC02 Primary DNS 10.1.1.1 >>...

...ible > under arbitrary conditions. > >> Just an idea: AD problems are often caused by DNS problems and we got >> the keyword "DNS islanding" in an other threat at the moment: Which DNS >> do your DCs use as primary? Their own or a different one? See >> http://retrohack.com/a-word-or-two-about-dns-islanding/ > > As I understood Linux resolving there is no static primary-secondary > concept for DNS. So I'll try to remove the self-dependence altogether > and see, if it enhances the situation. > > Regards, > - lars. >