WINS is outta here!... sort of. Microsoft's adoption of DNS makes our IT lives much less complicated. Here's a guide to working with it.
DNS, How Do I Love Thee?
WINS is outta here!... sort of. Microsoft's adoption of DNS makes our IT lives much less complicated. Here's a guide to working with it.
- By Harry Brelsford
- July 01, 2000
I love Windows 2000's Domain Name System (DNS), let me
count the ways…. First, there's the adoption of an industry
standard name resolution mechanism. Second, there's the
ability to design a Windows 2000 networking infrastructure
around the DNS namespace. Third, the possibilities are
seemingly endless when it comes to DNS in Windows 2000,
at least when discussing DNS configuration.
In last month's
column, I briefly defined DNS as a TCP/IP, standards-based
name resolution mechanism in Windows 2000. In a nutshell,
DNS is the default name system on the Internet, used to
resolve host names to IP addresses, and vice versa. When
you type in "www.mcpmag.com" in your Internet Explorer
browser, DNS is the mechanism that resolves that name
to "209.67.143.112" (or whatever the specific IP address
for www.mcpmag.com is this month). I like to think of
DNS as some smart phone book that shows host names resolved
to IP addresses. Why? In a similar nature, given (or Christian)
names are resolved to telephone numbers in the real world.
Get it? Don't forget that DNS effectively supplants Windows
Internet Naming System (WINS) as the default name resolution
system in Windows 2000 (although Win2K still supports
WINS for backward compatibility with NT and other legacy
Microsoft hosts).
Now, why should you care about DNS? Two reasons: The
real world and the MCSE exams (specifically exam 70-216).
Fortunately, in both cases, Microsoft has eased the transition
to DNS by hiding some DNS complexities behind friendly
wizards and also by making DNS act in smart ways, such
as dynamically updating itself. With respect to the MCSE
certification exams, Microsoft assumes you've yet to earn
a PhD in DNS, when in fact, an above average, working
knowledge of DNS will suffice. However, implicit in the
Microsoft certification exam process is the assumption
that you have a good grounding in DNS. At sometime, someone,
somewhere taught you the basics of TCP/IP and specifically
DNS. Did you take the TCP/IP elective exam to get your
MCSE? Unless you took off that day, you should have a
basic understanding of DNS.
Master Tip: The Windows
2000 Server online help system is packed full of DNS discussion
that'll get you up to speed quickly. You should also consider
reading the TCP/IP Core Networking Guide in the
Windows 2000 Server Resource Kit.
I've assumed that you've already installed DNS. It's
a safe assumption-DNS is installed almost seamlessly when
you install Active Directory on a Windows 2000 Server
command. To be honest, installing DNS in Windows 2000
takes nothing more than clicking Next a few times and
Finish while in the installation wizard. The real fun
happens prior to (the design phase) and after (the configuration
phase) installing DNS.
Industry Standard
In the minds of many MCSEs, the use of DNS as the default
name resolution system in Windows 2000 is both appreciated
and overdue. Many MCSEs are supporting complex Internet
connections and non-Microsoft hosts such as Linux workstations.
Remember that WINS in the old NT 4.0 days first and foremost
supported Microsoft clients. DNS represents Microsoft's
willingness to support an industry standard such as DNS.
More likely, Microsoft made such as change as much for
technical reasons as the fact you and I demanded it as
part of the technology community. Microsoft's emphasis
on DNS is a bit overdue, given the pervasive reach of
the Internet. In fairness to Microsoft, it wasn't blind
to DNS; rather, the delay in Windows 2000 effectively
delayed the default implementation of DNS in Microsoft's
networking solution.
As an industry standard, there's an unexpected benefit
to you, the student of DNS: If you've ever worked with
it, the knowledge you have about DNS is transferable to
Windows 2000. If you've every learned DNS in the Unix
world or even a generic networking class in college, you've
got it made.
In DNS, a client machine (known as a host) seeks to use
the resources of another machine (also known as a host).
This is shown in Figure 1 as a Windows 2000 Professional
workstation seeking to download a page from Microsoft
Certified Professional Magazine's Web site at www.mcpmag.com.
|
Figure 1. Basic need-a workstation
attempts to use a resource. |
Now, take the view in Figure 1 to the next level. In
Figure 2, the DNS servers that provide the name resolution
are introduced. The DNS server is a Windows 2000 Server
running on the local area network. Having received the
request for www.mcpmag.com, it resolves the request.
|
Figure 2. A DNS name resolution
scenario with DNS running on a Windows 2000 Server
on a local area network. |
Master Tip: There are
two query types in a DNS scenario, both of which are fair
game on the 70-216 MCSE exam. An iterative query is when
a client machine asks a DNS name server to resolve a name
resolution request. The DNS name server attempts a "best
effort" approach, using the information contained in its
cache or zone data. If no close match is found (the best
effort fails), the DNS name server returns a verdict to
the client machine advising it to try another DNS server.
This typically takes the form of the client machine trying
the next DNS server listed in the TCP/IP configuration
(on the client machine). A recursive query type is more
straightforward. If the initial DNS name server can't
resolve the query, it polls the next DNS name server higher
up (its authoritative server) for a result to the query.
If that doesn't work, the next DNS name server is polled,
etc.
Design Considerations
You as a Windows 2000 MCSE must decide what your name
space will be on your Windows 2000 network. It's an important
decision, and one with several factors: the size of your
organization, the Internet domain names you have the rights
to use, political considerations, and so on. In general,
you should start with a single domain and a single DNS
server, a configuration that will meet the needs of most
small (SORG) and medium-sized (MORG) organizations. (See
Figure 3.)
|
Figure 3. A single domain with
a single DNS server. |
Master Tip: The Internet
domain name you use is typically the same as your internal
domain name (the Win2K/NT-type). However, the names can
be separate.
If you work at the enterprise-level, you already know
that I've oversimplified the DNS design discussion. Clearly
the DNS name space issue can become much more complex
and include:
- Introduction of subdomains; you'd recognize this
as a third-level domain name (e.g. certs.mcpmag.com).
- Use of DNS servers on either or both sides of a firewall.
- Issues surrounding interoperability with Unix-based
DNS
- Placement of a DNS server at each Active Directory
site to boost overall network performance.
Kevin Kocis's article, "Team
Effort: Integrating Windows 2000 DNS with Unix DNS,"
in the May 2000 issue, offers some more advanced discussion
of DNS in an integrated Unix/NT/Win2K environment.
Additional
Information |
Here are a few excellent
DNS resources:
- Course 1562: Designing a Microsoft
Windows 2000 Networking Services Infrastructure
- Course 2153: Implementing a Microsoft
Windows 2000 Network Infrastructure
- Exam 70-216: Implementing and Administering
a Windows 2000 Network Infrastructure
(what better way to learn than the
pressure of the real certification
exam).
- "Team
Effort: Integrating Windows 2000 DNS
with Unix DNS" by Kevin Kocis,
MCP Magazine, May 2000
- Windows 2000 Server Resource
Kit (Microsoft Press; ISBN: 1572318058);
enjoy all 7,296 pages!
- Active Directory Design and Planning
(IDG Books, ISBN: 0764547135). This
is my book on Active Directory that
will hit the shelves in late summer
(2000)!
|
|
|
Configuration
How 'bout some hands-on stuff? This column isn't complete
without providing you an opportunity to try out something.
Let's create a new DNS zone and then dynamically update
it via the Win2K dynamic DNS feature. Again, I've assumed
that you've installed DNS when you built your Win2K Server
and implemented Active Directory.
- Launch the DNS Microsoft Management Console (MMC)
from the Administrative Tools program group.
- Right-click on the server object in the left part
of the DNS MMC and select New Zone. The New Zone Wizard
launches.
- Click Next.
- Select a Zone Type, as seen in Figure 4. The preferred
zone, assuming you will interact with live DNS servers
running on Windows 2000 Server machines is the Active
Directory integrated zone. The default selection is
Standard Primary which has greater interoperability
capabilities. Click Next.
|
Figure 4. Selecting a zone type.
Note the zone types are defined in the dialog box. |
- Create either a forward lookup zone or a backward
lookup zone (see Figure 5). Typically you'll want to
create a forward lookup zone as that's the way most
of us live in the real world (names are resolved to
IP addresses). Click Next.
|
Figure 5. Selecting either a
forward or reverse lookup zone. Note the lookup zone
options are defined in the dialog box. |
- Name the zone, typically with your Internet domain
name (e.g. expectationmanangement.com) Click Next.
- Click Finish. You've just created a zone.
Next, you'll allow the zone to be dynamically updated:
- Right-click the zone you created above by expanding
the Forward Lookup Zones folder in the left pane of
the DNS MMC.
- Select Properties. The property sheet for your zone
will appear.
- On the General tab sheet, you will elect whether
or not to allow dynamic updates. By selecting either
"Only secure updates" or "Yes", you have implemented
dynamic DNS for this zone. See Figure 6.
|
Figure 6. Implementing Windows
2000 Server's dynamic DNS features is as simple as
making a dialog box selection. Here, the secure updating
capability has been selected. |
- Click OK. You have now implemented dynamic DNS.
That's it! Now you know why I love DNS: Although it takes
some advanced planning before you implement it, DNS can
simplify your life. Now, aren't you glad I devoted a whole
column to it?