Software

Ask something
Question Locked

DNS on non-domain controller

0 helpful
5 replies

by goody3335

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.
I was wondering if it's okay to put DNS on a non-domain controller. What would be the reasons that I wouldn't want to do this?

5 replies

by bart777

It's no problem to have another server do the DNS for the domain.

The advantage to using a DC to do the job is that an Active Directory Integrated DNS server will do dynamic updates quickly and are very easy to maintain.

If it's done by another server or device then there may be some manual entries that you will want to do.

It's up to you. I've seen it done both ways. My preference is to use the DC and tie it to AD.

Best of luck

by goody3335

Thanks for your reply! I actually have a DNS server set up at HQ on a domain controller. I want to set up a DNS server at a remote site so they don't have to do name resolution over the VPN. I'd prefer not to mess around with the hosts file, etc. Thanks for your help!

by bart777

If you use windows to run DNS at the remote site you ca configure the servers to replicate to each other.

by cg it

having just a DNS server at a remote site which provides only name resolution.

Users at the remote site will still have to authenticate with your HQ domain controller to log in, therefore if you specify a secondary DNS server for remote users that's local, that DNS server will still simply resolve the query that a DC is at HQ. Something the DNS Server at HQ already does.

If your HQ DNS server is being over utilized, then your HQ Domain Controller most likely is being over utilized, thus a better use of resources for remote users is to place at the remote site not only a DNS server but a DC as well. This will effectively reduce the demand on the HQ DC and allow faster user authentication, and decrease the WAN usage.

This discussion is closed to new replies.