|
Home > Archive > 70-210 > March 2003 > Spid's Wed (3/5) Win2k Pro QoD
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Spid's Wed (3/5) Win2k Pro QoD
|
|
|
| Slinky is the Administrator for a small LAN consisting of 2 Windows 2000 Servers and 20 Windows 2000 Professional clients. TCP/IP is the only protocol running on the network.
One of the servers is a DHCP server and all 20 workstations are configured to obtain their IP address configuration from the DHCP server.
Slinky decides to give his users Internet access by connecting a 128Kbps ISDN modem to one of the Windows 2000 Professional computers and enabling/configuring ICS. After Slinky sets up the computer to dial up to the Internet successfully, he "turns on" ICS. However, when he does this, none of the other client computers on the LAN can access the shared connection. Uh oh.....
Poor, poor Slinky, what is the most likely cause for his current predicament? (Select the best choice from the following)
A. Slinky needs to add the ISP's DNS server addresses as DHCP scope options.
B. Slinky needs to remove the DHCP server from the network (or remove the DHCP server service from running on the server).
C. Slinky must assign all the client computers on the LAN static IP addresses
D. Slinky needs to configure ICS for the LAN connection instead of the dial-up connection to the Internet.
I know ICS stinks and NAT rulez but bear with me for the question ok? 
Good luck and see you tomorrow for the answer!! | |
| Slinky 2003-03-05, 8:25 am |
| B is the most likely cause. | |
| Qivalon 2003-03-05, 10:35 am |
| Slinky decides to give his users Internet access by connecting a 128Kbps ISDN modem to one of the Windows 2000 Professional computers and enabling/configuring ICS. After Slinky sets up the computer to dial up to the Internet successfully, he "turns on" ICS. However, when he does this, none of the other client computers on the LAN can access the shared connection. Uh oh.....
Poor, poor Slinky, what is the most likely cause for his current predicament? (Select the best choice from the following)
A. Slinky needs to add the ISP's DNS server addresses as DHCP scope options.
B. Slinky needs to remove the DHCP server from the network (or remove the DHCP server service from running on the server).
C. Slinky must assign all the client computers on the LAN static IP addresses
D. Slinky needs to configure ICS for the LAN connection instead of the dial-up connection to the Internet.
Ok, (only guessing here)
A is out we are not touching an ISP.
D is probably out as we never were told we had a connection to the outside the world via a LAN
C is a probable one I have done just that but via a T1 line, not a modem.
B gives out IP addresses, they are never the same, which would cause a modem no end of heartache
So I am going with C, but then I run into the problem if I make all Static IP addresses, why do I need a DHCP?
Qivalon~ Bring on more questions! | |
| enforcer 2003-03-05, 11:34 am |
| Slinky, slowly approaches the DHCP server gently mumuring "it's alright ol' boy I know it's been great, but you see we have to use this microsoft ICS service to enable the rest of the people to access the internet, and well you see it has it's own built in IP addresser, and although it's not as configurable as yours, we have to use it, so i'm gonna have to turn you off. Don't worry as soon as we can implement something like NAT, we'll bring you back. bye bye ol' friend.
you can see the tears welling up in Slinky's eyes as he chooses option B and turns off the DHCP service. | |
| jonhiker 2003-03-05, 12:25 pm |
| B)..... so long, DHCP, hello static IP addresses. | |
| sgirardo 2003-03-05, 1:08 pm |
| B | |
|
| quote:
Originally posted by enforcer
Slinky, slowly approaches the DHCP server gently mumuring "it's alright ol' boy I know it's been great, but you see we have to use this microsoft ICS service to enable the rest of the people to access the internet, and well you see it has it's own built in IP addresser, and although it's not as configurable as yours, we have to use it, so i'm gonna have to turn you off. Don't worry as soon as we can implement something like NAT, we'll bring you back. bye bye ol' friend.
you can see the tears welling up in Slinky's eyes as he chooses option B and turns off the DHCP service.
Nice story Enforcer, I could feel Slinky's sadness almost as if I was there myself.  | |
| Epidemic 2003-03-05, 1:42 pm |
| B. | |
|
|
|
|
| WPFossil 2003-03-05, 3:18 pm |
| Let's just hope Slinky's tears didn't short out the server!
B. | |
| gcw123 2003-03-05, 8:36 pm |
| C | |
| Slinky 2003-03-05, 9:55 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by gcw123
C
Bah, doing C does nothing for the fact that DHCP still exists on the network and we all know (or should know) that DHCP and DNS do not play nicely with ICS. 
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=250603 | |
| mandani 2003-03-05, 11:58 pm |
| D.
ICS needs a NIC card for the internal LAN. The ISDN connection will be shared through the ICS computer as a gateway. | |
| gcw123 2003-03-06, 9:56 am |
| If shared connection in the question is mean internet shared connection, then B is the correct answer because it only work on private addesses.
If DHCP server is exist, all client computer will received non-private addresses, this cause the internet shared connection failed.
Slinky, thanks for help and info. | |
| gcw123 2003-03-06, 9:58 am |
| quote:
Originally posted by Slinky
Bah, doing C does nothing for the fact that DHCP still exists on the network and we all know (or should know) that DHCP and DNS do not play nicely with ICS.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=250603
Agree, you are right. | |
| tharg 2003-03-06, 10:20 am |
| B! | |
|
| quote:
Originally posted by Spid
Slinky is the Administrator for a small LAN consisting of 2 Windows 2000 Servers and 20 Windows 2000 Professional clients. TCP/IP is the only protocol running on the network.
One of the servers is a DHCP server and all 20 workstations are configured to obtain their IP address configuration from the DHCP server.
Slinky decides to give his users Internet access by connecting a 128Kbps ISDN modem to one of the Windows 2000 Professional computers and enabling/configuring ICS. After Slinky sets up the computer to dial up to the Internet successfully, he "turns on" ICS. However, when he does this, none of the other client computers on the LAN can access the shared connection. Uh oh.....
Poor, poor Slinky, what is the most likely cause for his current predicament? (Select the best choice from the following)
A. Slinky needs to add the ISP's DNS server addresses as DHCP scope options.
B. Slinky needs to remove the DHCP server from the network (or remove the DHCP server service from running on the server).
C. Slinky must assign all the client computers on the LAN static IP addresses
D. Slinky needs to configure ICS for the LAN connection instead of the dial-up connection to the Internet.
I know ICS stinks and NAT rulez but bear with me for the question ok?
Good luck and see you tomorrow for the answer!!
And the answer is....B
Poor old Slinky needs to either remove the DHCP server completely or remove the DHCP service from the server. In addition to that, he will probably need to go around and release and renew the IP addresses of the clients so they will get their new IP configuration information from the DHCP allocator service within ICS. You configure the ICS connection sharing on the device that is configured as the external connection to the Internet. In this case, that would be the ISDN modem. You could assign static ip addresses to all of the client PCs in the 192.168.0.2 to 192.168.0.254/24 range and manually configure the ISP DNS server configuration if you wanted to. The ICS "server" will be assigned the 192.168.0.1/24 address and it's DHCP allocator service assigns clients IP addresses in the 192.168.0.2 - 192.168.0.254/24 range. The clients would, at this point, not be configured to even look for any DHCP server. But this is not the "best" Microsoft way to go about accomplishing your goal(way too much administrative overhead), and it's definitely not a must thing to do as answer "C" states. In addition to the fact that you would still have an unused DHCP server on the network (not the most efficient use of resources).
I know, I know, just setup NAT and be done with it. |
|
|
|
|