I want Member server with 'DNS not AD DC???

Hewlett-packard Microsoft windows server...
March 5, 2011 at 10:14:58
Specs: Windows xp, 1222
When i create my first 2008 AD DC, does it have to have DNS? when dcpromo steps through it says AD DC must have DNS or could i point it to another 2008 server that is already setup as DNS server? i would like a seperate win 2008 machine to be DNS. Would this seperate DNS 2008 server be a member server?
Is creating a member server just like adding the server to the domain, just like adding a regular pc to the domain?

See More: I want Member server with DNS not AD DC???

Report •

#1
March 5, 2011 at 10:54:35
"When i create my first 2008 AD DC, does it have to have DNS? "
yes. you can replicated it to another server later. you should have multiple dns servers for failover

"i would like a seperate win 2008 machine to be DNS"
that would be a waste of a server and you are not considering dns failover

"Would this seperate DNS 2008 server be a member server?"
yes but you should have a minimum of two DCs again for AD failover

"just like adding a regular pc to the domain?"
yes

Answers are only as good as the information you provide.
How to properly post a question:
Sorry no tech support via PM's


Report •

#2
March 5, 2011 at 11:50:45
For proper redundancy you really want at least two DNS servers with Active Directory integrated zones. This does away with the Primary/Secondary nature of DNS servers and provides additional resiliancy should either DNS server fail.

I believe this means that the DNS server needs to run on a DC. I can think of no good reason why you would want to run the DNS server on a non-DC.


Report •

#3
March 6, 2011 at 09:06:26
so if i have a Win 2008 PDC and a BDC, that would be 2 DNS servers, so if PDC goes down for some reason the BDC will take over DNS duties? Is this DNS setup good for a LAN?

What should member servers be mainly used for, a print server, file server??

would I setup a WIN 2008 WSUS server as a member server? just a server doing only WSUS? or would it be a stand alone server?


Report •

Related Solutions

#4
March 6, 2011 at 11:03:05
There are no such things as PDCs and BDCs in Windows 2008. They are all just DCs and (with certain exceptions) are all equivalent. If one fails then the rest just keep working.

You can use member servers for file and print sharing, webs serving, database, etc. or you can also run those services on DCs, depending upon the load. I successfully ran a network supporting about 500 users with, initially, just two servers, both DCs, doing file and print serving. I wouldn't have thought that you needed to dedicate a whole machine to WSUS.

Personally, if I had, say 4 servers in all, I would set 3 of them up as DCs. Not only does this provide additional redundancy but it also shares the work of processing log-ons between the three.


Report •

#5
March 8, 2011 at 08:21:29
IJACK - the 2 DC setup that you had, were both DC's also running DNS. What was doing DHCP for the clients?
WSUS - would that be on a member server, just doing WSUS?

Report •

#6
March 8, 2011 at 10:21:57
It is a microsoft recommendation
both contain the global catalog
both contain dns
some even do split scope dhcp though bring up dhcp is quick and easy in case of failure.

what you put wsus on depends on how many pcs you are updating. Light load put it on a DC

Answers are only as good as the information you provide.
How to properly post a question:
Sorry no tech support via PM's


Report •

#7
March 8, 2011 at 12:01:50
I can't honestly remember which server we ran WSUS on but, as wanderer says, you shouldn't have any problems running it on a DC. He also mentions split DHCP; that's a very good idea. You want DHCP to keep functioning even if one server fails, but you can't have two DHCP server covering the same range - that could lead to all sorts of problems.

DNS, DHCP, and WSUS aren't particularly taxing (particularly on a small network) and if you run the first two on two servers then you are cutting the workload in half for each anyway. The same goes for file and print sharing. It's far more important (IMO) to provide redundancy rather than worrying about performance.

Now once you start running databse and web servers, that's a different matter. I would recommend using a standalone member server for that. And, of course, as the number of users increases you will want to keep a check on the performance of the servers to make sure that they are not overloaded.


Report •

#8
March 9, 2011 at 11:11:53
thanks guys.

a side question; why when i have AD configured it also seems to add the File Service role? I did not add that role. I dont want a file server

can i remove that role?


Report •

#9
March 9, 2011 at 11:32:32
The Server service is installed by default to provide administrative share support for management tools.

Answers are only as good as the information you provide.
How to properly post a question:
Sorry no tech support via PM's


Report •

#10
March 9, 2011 at 11:50:16
It's not a bad idea to keep those shares (and hence keep the file server service running) even though you don't intend it to be a general purpose file server. It can be quite useful sometimes to access data on the server remotely.

But that is interesting; I've just set up a test 2008 system and I'm sure that I had to add the File Service role. Perhaps they've changed it for some reason.


Report •

Ask Question