This is a discussion on Re: Importing large amounts of addresses into Microsoft DNS within the Bind Users forums, part of the DNS and Related Forums category; -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 d.needles@comcast.net wrote: > > Actually in a > pinch you can ...
|
|||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 d.needles@comcast.net wrote: > > Actually in a > pinch you can also download CYGWIN to get UNIX tools on Windows in a pinch. Two pinches? Some of us would download it (or something similar) if forced to administer a Windows NT box without any pinching ;) Perhaps the missing bit is that NT DNS allows you to store the DNS information in files rather than the registry, and I'd recommend using files. So it is basically the same issue as importing into BIND. On the downside I only ever used Windows NT DNS at one site because the client insisted, it really wasn't upto the task of serious DNS serving, even on the site I was persuaded to use it, they failed to note the wonderful way repeated retries to transfer a duff domain was eating vast chunks of their bandwidth. It works well when everything is perfect, but look at the hoops you have to jump through to troubleshoot simple problems, and compare that with other DNS servers like BIND 9. W2K DNS on the other hand has more reasons to make you "buy in" to Microsoft DNS, however I can't help pointing out that this is deliberate policy on the part of Microsoft, but that is another issue. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/HXtPGFXfHI9FVgYRAoYkAJoCXH2GRNXKzS5kN4J8jHO220S7RQ Cfa0ig dZ2KMyQpKf55Rf5etAN6Zow= =UppS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |