My question is in regards to setting up a new network. Our new network is W2K and our ISP is providing us with our ip configuration. They have asked if we want to have them do our DNS or if we would be housing our own DNS server. I know that W2K can be a DNS server, but is it necessary for all primary domain controllers to also be DNS?

First of all, and most importantly, how big is your network? How many DNS servers depends on how large your network is and how many domains it will contain. The biggest advantage to 2000 DNS is Active Directory Integrated zones that support secure dynamic updates. Personally, I'd be 3 days dead before I let some lamer in an ISP host my DNS. But then I have the training and I am qualified to run DNS in 2000. Chances are the person who offered you this service isn't even qualified to set up AD integrated DNS zones in 2000 DNS. If I seem to be going off a bit, I apologize, but I'm in the middle of attempting to help a poor soul out who got talked into doing just what you've been offered. He's regretting it, and me, I'd like to find out who his ISP is and go make them eat the computer they have the DNS set up on. Where was I....oh yes (thank you, I feel better now) You can run a single domain on ONE DNS server. Two is better, it provides redundancy (ie: if one dies suddenly, there's no disruption to the network...the 2nd one does the job while you fix DNS server #1) You do not need a DNS server on every DC (that's DC...as in domain controller.....PDC is NT nomenclature and there are no PDC's and BDC's in a pure 2000 environment) Lets say you have a single domain in your forest. You have two DNS servers and you have changed your domain to native mode and setup AD an integrated zone with secure dynamic updates enabled. All you have to do then is enable DNS forwarding so that request's outside your zone (ie: on the internet) are forwarded to your ISP's DNS server, or any one of a large number of DNS servers on the internet. I realize this can all be confusing if you don't have the background and training so to simplify, email me, give me the particulars on your network (size, number of PC's, number of domains, etc etc) and I'll explain the best setup for you. I'll even waive my normal consulting fee just to thumb my nose at your greedy ISP. (or you could offer me half of what they were going to charge you for setting up your DNS for you....I never say no to $) *smile*

I will add something here. The DNS for your internal network, your AD network should be handled by a w2k DC running the DNS service as Curt suggests. In this scenario, the w2k server will handle all DNS requests require by your clients regarding w2k issues and name resolution. Then by enabling Forwarding, outside requests will be sent to your ISP if you have them configured as a Forwarder. What your ISP may be offering is if you have a web site(s) that need to be hosted on the Internet, they may be offering to handle those DNS functions for you. That would be reasonable in my opinion. It would be very unusual to have an ISP handle DNS functions for a Windows 2000 Active Directory Domain.

cale- if you set up your new network with Active Directory, yes, you need a local DNS server. If you are a small business (less than 100 users and one domain) AD is more trouble than it's worth, unless you are an MCSE looking for job security. :) However, you probably would be better off with a local DNS server- but set it up as "caching only" You can probably do this yourself with the configure your server tool, and by reading a few help screens.