search for: second_dc

...online Microsoft >>> tech documents. I don't believe that DC's create NS records by >>> default. >> >> You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? >> >> I am not sure I understand the above. Do you suggest to create >> another NS record for the Second_DC, or not to? >> >> In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs are listed as DNS >> servers. I like to think that the member servers eventually ask the >> second DNS server, if the first won't respond. This seems to be >> reflected by ping taking more than 5...

...I don't believe that DC's create NS records by >>>>> default. >>>> >>>> You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? >>>> >>>> I am not sure I understand the above. Do you suggest to create >>>> another NS record for the Second_DC, or not to? >>>> >>>> In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs are listed as DNS >>>> servers. I like to think that the member servers eventually ask the >>>> second DNS server, if the first won't respond. This seems to be >>>&...

...the confusion. I demoted my DC1 a while ago due to > hardware problems. I mean to replace it, because currently my First_DC > (FSMO role holder and SOA) is a virtual machine on a storage server > which isn't ideal for many reasons. > > Currently I have DC2 (First_DC) and DC3 (Second_DC). Had I paid > attention to this, I would have changed the names in the text and > output snippets I posted. > > Again: I apologize. > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > Your host file is queried first before your dns server. I say usually...

...e above was taken almost verbatim from online Microsoft >> tech documents. I don't believe that DC's create NS records by default. > > You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? > > I am not sure I understand the above. Do you suggest to create another > NS record for the Second_DC, or not to? > > In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs are listed as DNS > servers. I like to think that the member servers eventually ask the > second DNS server, if the first won't respond. This seems to be > reflected by ping taking more than 5 s for the first pac...

...gt;> tech documents. I don't believe that DC's create NS records by >>>> default. >>> >>> You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? >>> >>> I am not sure I understand the above. Do you suggest to create >>> another NS record for the Second_DC, or not to? >>> >>> In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs are listed as DNS >>> servers. I like to think that the member servers eventually ask the >>> second DNS server, if the first won't respond. This seems to be >>> reflected by pin...

...believe that DC's create NS records by default. > > > You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? > > I am not sure I understand the above. Do you > suggest to create another NS record for the > Second_DC, or not to? > > In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs > are listed as DNS servers. I like to think that > the member servers eventually ask the second DNS > server, if the first won't respo...

On 11/20/2015 7:40 AM, Ole Traupe wrote: > > > Am 20.11.2015 um 11:54 schrieb mathias dufresne: >> Hi Ole, >> >> I'm still not answering your issue but I come back to speak about >> TTL. Perhaps someone would be able to bring us some light on that. >> >> This morning I'm trying to reproduce the way I do broke my test AD >> domain. This

...hat DC's create NS records by default. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? >>>>> >>>>> I am not sure I understand the above. Do you suggest to create another >>>>> NS record for the Second_DC, or not to? >>>>> >>>>> In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs are listed as DNS >>>>> servers. I like to think that the member servers eventually ask the second >>>>> DNS server, if the first won't respond. This seems to be...

...ecords by default. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? >>>>>> >>>>>> I am not sure I understand the above. Do you suggest to create >>>>>> another NS record for the Second_DC, or not to? >>>>>> >>>>>> In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs are listed as DNS >>>>>> servers. I like to think that the member servers eventually ask the second >>>>>> DNS server, if the first won't respond. T...

.... >>> >>> >>> You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? >>> >>> I am not sure I understand the above. Do you >>> suggest to create another NS record for the >>> Second_DC, or not to? >>> >>> In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs >>> are listed as DNS servers. I like to think that >>> the member servers eventually ask the second DNS >>>...

...t;>> >>> >>> You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? >>> >>> I am not sure I understand the above. Do you >>> suggest to create another NS record for the >>> Second_DC, or not to? >>> >>> In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs >>> are listed as DNS servers. I like to think that >>> the member servers eventually ask the second DNS >>>...

...create NS records by default. >> >> >> You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? >> >> I am not sure I understand the above. Do you >> suggest to create another NS record for the >> Second_DC, or not to? >> >> In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs >> are listed as DNS servers. I like to think that >> the member servers eventually ask the second DNS >> server, if the f...

...create NS records by default. >> >> >> You mean Samba DCs or DCs in general? >> >> I am not sure I understand the above. Do you >> suggest to create another NS record for the >> Second_DC, or not to? >> >> In the resolv.conf on my member servers both DCs >> are listed as DNS servers. I like to think that >> the member servers eventually ask the second DNS >> server, if the f...

Hi, I tested the AD (Samba4) domain log-in on Windows 7 clients and Linux member servers with my PDC being offline (plugged the cable). It is not working so well. On Windows it initially takes forever. It works again after rebooting the client, which seems to be the easiest solution (can be performed by the user). On Linux member servers, ssh log-in eventually times out. It works again,

...r SOA? I am sorry about the confusion. I demoted my DC1 a while ago due to hardware problems. I mean to replace it, because currently my First_DC (FSMO role holder and SOA) is a virtual machine on a storage server which isn't ideal for many reasons. Currently I have DC2 (First_DC) and DC3 (Second_DC). Had I paid attention to this, I would have changed the names in the text and output snippets I posted. Again: I apologize. > > > > > > >

...moted my DC1 a while ago due to >> hardware problems. I mean to replace it, because currently my >> First_DC (FSMO role holder and SOA) is a virtual machine on a storage >> server which isn't ideal for many reasons. >> >> Currently I have DC2 (First_DC) and DC3 (Second_DC). Had I paid >> attention to this, I would have changed the names in the text and >> output snippets I posted. >> >> Again: I apologize. >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > Your...

...ago due to >>> hardware problems. I mean to replace it, because currently my >>> First_DC (FSMO role holder and SOA) is a virtual machine on a >>> storage server which isn't ideal for many reasons. >>> >>> Currently I have DC2 (First_DC) and DC3 (Second_DC). Had I paid >>> attention to this, I would have changed the names in the text and >>> output snippets I posted. >>> >>> Again: I apologize. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>&...

On 11/20/2015 10:17 AM, mathias dufresne wrote: > > > 2015-11-20 15:11 GMT+01:00 James <lingpanda101 at gmail.com > <mailto:lingpanda101 at gmail.com>>: > > On 11/20/2015 7:40 AM, Ole Traupe wrote: > > > > Am 20.11.2015 um 11:54 schrieb mathias dufresne: > > Hi Ole, > > I'm still not answering your issue