WINS vs DNS 1

[teknoguy]

could someone tell me where i would use wins or dns. i know what they do - resolves names to ip addresses, but i just don't know why you would have a wins server and a dns server on the same segment. what computers would use wins and what computers would use dns.

thanks a bunch.

 

[jjgraf]

WINS server is no longer going to be updated beyond W2K server. Wins was MS method of doing name lookups on DHCP clients in a large networks.

In W2K Dynamic DNS will DHCP replaces WINS server for name lookups.

All new DNS servers support Dynamic updates so their is no reason to deploy WINS anymore. You are only adding network over head.

hope this helps

 

[teknoguy]

ive just seen diagrams of networks with wins servers and dns servers on the same segment.. so im taking it that the wins servers are for older os's like win 95 win98 and nt. is this correct??

 

[welshguy]

Teknoguy,

Forget DHCP it's just confusing the issue - DHCP assigns dynamic IP addresses to clients - you can also use it via scopes - to assign DNS and WINS server addresses to clients (amongst other things). You don't need DHCP for WINs or DNS.
Although the new WINS server supports dynamic updates for IP addresses assigned via DHCP.

They are both methods of Name resolution - however
WINS maps IP addresses to Netbios names.
DNS maps FQDN (fully qualified domain names)names to Ip addresses.

JJgraf is right WINS will no longer be developed as part of a Windows name resolution system.

You basically need WINS to supportname resolution for clients that do not support the DNS FQDN format.

If you have a WIN2000 network with no down level clients you should use DNS integrated via Active Directory.
It's a big subject but worth learning particularly DNS

Try these links

http://www.windows2000faq.com/Articles/Index.cfm?DepartmentID=814

http://www.win2000mag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=21430

Good practical info in these

Hope this helps

 

[welshguy]

Sorry Tecknoguy

Just noticed didn't really answer your question
Should be a politician !

Yes you are correct WINS is for supporting name resolution on the older OSs you mention.

 

[jjgraf]

The reason i brought up DHCP running on W2K is it can do Dynamic Updates to DNS server for clients that do not support Dynamic DNS.

BTW win9X and WinNt support DNS lookups with out WINS.

The biggest issue i think is you don't need WINS on your network anymore and really did not need unless you had a large network with all kinds of subnets running.

 

[ShackDaddy]

You guys have it partially right, but WINS remains a useful service in any network that has NT and Win9x clients. Any time an NT machine tries to map a drive, it can use WINS to resolve the NetBIOS name to an IP address. Any time the Netlogon service on an NT client wants to validate a user login, it uses WINS to identify a domain controller. The Network Neighborhood browsing list is generated through WINS communication. Any command-line command that starts with 'net' can profitably use WINS to resolve computernames, and won't be able to easily use DNS instead.

NetBIOS applications like I've described won't tolerate aliases or FQDN's, so a DNS environment won't always provide valid mappings for them. NetBIOS names, which the services I described above use, aren't the same as host names.

Setting up a single WINS server for a company with under 1000 systems is so simple and hassle-free that I would just go ahead and set one up. I've found that single WINS server installations (appropriate for any business with a single site or at least high-bandwidth connections between sites) take almost no maintenance and solve a lot of headaches. Just use DHCP, if you have it, to assign the WINS server address to the clients, and you are set.

ShackDaddy
MCSE, MCT, CCNA

 

[jjgraf]

But WINS never was a required in Windows Networking. It was added as an after thought to improve performance on very large network any thing less than 100 computers it's waste of Network resources. NetBOIS is a broadcasting protocol which eats up all kinds of Network Resources and WINS was attempt to reduce that Network Overhead.

All Win9X clients can use DNS lookups or resort to NETbois broadcasting to find a computer. In a large network netbois would resort to broadcasting if the WINS server was far away. Which then WINS solved nothing.

 

[ShackDaddy]

Come on, jjgraf, you are getting technically superstitious about something that should be evaluated on its practicality. Where did you get this 'anything less than 100 computers it's a waste of network resources' stuff from? What network resources? RAM on a server? Traffic on the LAN? WINS creates little network overhead, compared to a single person on your LAN who might be checking CNN every couple of hours.

For starters, NetBIOS isn't even a protocol. You are thinking of NetBEUI, which IS a broadcasting protocol. I'm talking about NetBIOS applications that run on TCP/IP and have different name resolution needs than LPD, FTP, and other more purely TCP/IP-based services. WINS has little to do with NetBEUI.

Let me point out some things.

The only way to do NetBIOS name resolution across a router is either to use WINS or to put an LMHOSTS file on the client. If you have a single subnet, then sure, you can do without WINS and rely on NetBIOS broadcasts to resolve names. Did you see the word I used? BROADCASTS. So I'm saying that using WINS is an alternative to having your clients BROADCAST to resolve NetBIOS names. And unless your routers are forwarding these BROADCASTS, all the noise still won't help your clients quickly map drives across routers.

You can tell your clients how to handle NetBIOS name resolution by setting the node type. You are right when you say that sometimes the clients don't wait long enough for WINS to resolve the name before they start broadcasting anyway, but you can set the node type to "L", which will force the client to ONLY use WINS, and never broadcast. I personally like to use Hybrid mode only, but I know that Bill Boswell, who wrote Inside Windows 2000 Server, prefer's the 'L' mode.

Putting WINS on your network can 1) reduce traffic, 2) ease and speed up name resolution for several different types of tasks, 3) populate your Network Neighborhood on NT and Win9x systems, and 4) make cross-network (and even cross-trust) logons faster and simpler. I have a lot of experience implementing and writing about WINS, DNS, and DHCP, and I recommend it.

 

[welshguy]

Shackdaddy,
I agree with jjgraf - only keep WINS if you have to ie downlevel clients- the rest of your points are just plain wrong.

1) "The only way to do NetBIOS name resolution across a router is either to use WINS or to put an LMHOSTS file on the client"

Incorrect Win2000 DNS can resolve netbios addresses.

2) "BROADCASTS. So I'm saying that using WINS is an alternative to having your clients BROADCAST to resolve NetBIOS names"

Slightly patronising and still wrong see above.

3) "You can tell your clients how to handle NetBIOS name resolution by setting the node type."

Really !! What a revelation

4) "Putting WINS on your network can reduce traffic"
Absolute rubbish - only if you can't design a proper infrastructure!!!
And if you don't understand that netbios names can be resolved via Win2000 DNS. Microsoft (and Mr Boswell) recommend losing WINS if no downlevel clients on network.
And of course Wins has a significant network overhead - and you have incorrect name registrations and all sort of wierd stuff.
WINS is a major headache on anything other than a small network - we have 60,000 clients and it is an utter nightmare - WINS problems just aren't as noticeable on a small network.

5) "Populate your Network Neighborhood on NT and Win9x systems"
Ok if you've got these clients fair enough but publishing resources in AD is much more efficient with native network.

Anybody who wants to run an efficient, streamlined network should ditch WINS if they can. And to be honest Netbeui -
ok it's quick but when it has to run over a TCP/IP stack it's just another overhead.

I could go on and on ...

And do you know who really likes Netbeui - hackers !

Good debate
No personal attack meant just disagree with you !

Cheers

 

[jjgraf]

I was going to post a response but I think welshguy said it all. Thank you Welshguy.

 

[ShackDaddy]

We are speaking at cross purposes. This issue began heating up once the substantial presence of legacy clients was assumed. Everything you've said about a pure Win2000 network, I agree with. Many of the networks of mid-sized companies that I've worked on have been mixed at best. Three to ten Windows2000 systems, 15 to 40 NT servers, and a widely mixed client base. Between one and ten subnets. In these types of networks, most of what I've said is true.

1) You say that Win2000 DNS can do NetBIOS name resolution. Sure it can, and actually, so could NT4 DNS, although not as reliably. Problem is, most downlevel clients will broadcast to resolve names before going to DNS for resolution, and there is no node type to set to get around this. So I shouldn't have said "the only way." But on a practical level, AFAICS, WINS would still be the best option in the network I described.

2) How can my statement, "using WINS is an alternative to having your clients BROADCAST to resolve NetBIOS names" be wrong? I dropped any absolute terms when I wrote this, I said "is an alternative to...broadcast[ing]".

3) A person partaking in the common confusion between NetBIOS and NetBEUI can be profitably reminded that node types can be used to control resolution traffic. Teknoguy started this discussion, and I thought he'd like to know that node types exist, if he didn't already. Don't be snotty, and I'll try not to be myself.

4) Again, in the context of talking about WINS aiding name resolution for downlevel clients in a mixed network, why would my saying "Putting WINS on your network can reduce traffic" be absolute rubbish? If we were talking about a pure network there wouldn't be a need for it, we know that. The original poster asked which systems would use DNS for resolution and which would use WINS. The discussion needed to be shifted to 1) client types and 2) application types. Maybe I didn't always make it clear that I was talking about downlevel systems, but I stand be my statement. Notice my qualifier, please. "...CAN reduce..." Ick. I don't want to be defending myself, I want to be defending facts. Sorry.

To wrap up, let me respond to something you added:
1) "Anybody who wants to run an efficient, streamlined network should ditch WINS if they can."

Exactly right, but anybody who's interested in running the kind of network you describe needs to understand what 'can' constitutes. If one has a lot of downlevel clients and multiple subnets, and Win95 systems with printers shared off of them, mixed in with Active Directory and maybe some remaining NT BDC's, WINS is something you should seriously consider to meet the objectives welshguy described. You might not be able to profitably ditch WINS.

2) "And to be honest Netbeui - ok it's quick but when it has to run over a TCP/IP stack it's just another overhead."

NetBEUI doesn't run over a TCP/IP stack. NetBIOS does. This confusion strikes almost everyone, and it's coloring your response to me. NetBEUI runs at layers 3, 4 and 5 (although really only 4 and 5), and is a non-routing alternative to TCP/IP. NetBIOS is a Presentation layer protocol (layer 6).

Good discussion. We'll hammer out some truth between us.

 

[jjgraf]

First NetBios is a protocol/API that is used by programers like my myself

here is some tid pits about NetBOIS

http://members.tripod.com/~Gavin_Winston/NETBIOS.HTM

http://www.oreilly.com/reference/dictionary/tsearch.cgi?NetBIOS

http://support.baynetworks.com/library/tpubs/html/router/soft1200/117358AA/B_109.HTM

Also be assured that i never meant Netbeui. if you have more than five computers ditch it right now.

Changing the NODE type. yes that is a big help in reducing traffic but can be real pain if you have thousands of computers, Sense it's turned on by default by MS.

and yes NetBIOS does broadcast itself to insure no duplicate names on a network, that is the reason people to try to kill NetBIOS on WANs

 

[ShackDaddy]

1) Sure, NetBIOS is a protocol, but it's not a network layer protocol, so it's not spoken of in the IP, IPX, AppleTalk litany.

NetBIOS was originally designed by IBM to run in conjunction with NetBEUI, so many of the criticisms of it are in the context of NetBEUI. Those main criticisms are: not routable, and no windowing function to ensure efficient flow control. NetBIOS, being a layer 6 protocol, couldn't take care of those issues, and running in the context of NetBEUI as the lower layer transport, didn't have any help. NetBIOS over TCP/IP (NBT)doesn't have those problems, and the note that many texts have about NetBIOS not being workable with WAN links isn't made in the NBT context.

2) Changing the node type on all your clients is as easy as four clicks and two keystrokes on a single system, if you have DHCP in place.

Ah, ok, so there's your NetBIOS broadcast. Sure, it broadcasts in the same way that ARP and other useful protocols do. Nice thing is, as you point out, it can be eliminated. One way to do it is to install WINS. That replaces the bulk of the broadcast traffic (I didn't say all) with directed traffic, if the node types of the clients are set properly. Of course, we are talking about a mixed client base.

BTW, routed WAN links aren't affected by these broadcasts, because, well, we're talking about routed links. The problem then becomes not how to stop the broadcasts from interfering with your WAN links, but to achieve the same end that the broadcasts were attempting, without broadcasting.

 

[iggystar]

A heated discussion about wins?

Who knew such things were possible! I'm filled with wonderment!

 

[jjgraf]

Just for the record i did not start this.

 

[welshguy]

Guys,

Fun stuff !!
I think we are arguing at cross purposes - what wound me up was Shackdaddy's rather patronising lecture at jjgrafs post (which seemed to imply was wrong but was perfectly correct). We are all basically saying the same thing - except we are in a Win2000 server forum and the question was asked why/when to use WINS and/or DNS -which was answered sometime ago! To extole the virtues of WINS in a mixed environment is not exactly difficult!

To summarise
Downlevel clients - you're stuck with WINS to some extent.
Native 2000 - get rid of it !

However I must admit though there is one interesting point
I have learned (and it's not the difference between Netbeui and Netbios ! - although I'll admit I asked for that one - must use brain when typing!)

The point is one that Shackdaddy raised about node types - what's L node ? - as far as I was aware there is

B Node - Broadcast
P Node - peer to peer
M node - Mixed
H Node - Hybrid

If L Node will only use an NBNS and not resort to broadcasts - this sounds useful. Although I do not see how you can set it except manually as there doesn't seem to be an option in DHCP scope options for this (though could be wrong).

I would be grateful for pointers on the above.

Me - I'm aiming to eliminate WINS(well-NetBT specifically) at my first opportunity and save myself some headaches (and the computer browser service while I'm at it!)


Cheers

 

[ShackDaddy]

Good summary and evaluation.

DHCP Option 46 (NetBIOS/WINS Node Type) allows the node type for DHCP clients to be configured automatically. Setting the node type to P (I think I accidentally said "L&quot should force the client to make all queries to WINS. Welshguy, I'm not sure what 'peer-to-peer' is supposed to mean, but I know that P-node operates in a 'WINS only, no broadcasts' fashion.

The downside to P-node is that if the client can't find it's WINS server (outage or whatever), all registrations and resolutions fail. Well, unless they are resolvable via DNS or LMHOSTS or the local DNS cache.

Bill Boswell has a good discussion of the merits of P-node vs. H-node on page 202 of "Inside Windows 2000 Server".

Cheers!

ShackDaddy

 

[welshguy]

Thanks Shackdaddy,
It's an interesting section - to be honest he makes a good case for P node - I've never really read up on this settings in detail.

He makes the point that I think Jjgraf made that you cannot get rid of broadcasts just by putting in a WINS server.
This is my experience in that I have always used H node (which does seem the most logical) but there is still a lot of network traffic generated by broadcasts for netbios name queries.
These are often illogical in that a WINS server is available and accessible - yet still these broadcasts are created. It's one of these things that you'd like to check out but never get round to.

The P node looks to be the setting to use in the context of a mixed Win2000 environment - because it minimises impact on the network and restricts downlevel clients to just using a WINS server. Of course it has the downside you mentioned but I guess this depends on your network layout.
I would guess many people just use H node because it's safer - in the same way people just keep using WINS. How many networks will end up with an entirely irrelevant WINS infrastructure on a native Win2k network ? There will be quite a few I would guess !!

(The Peer to Peer expression is the same as Point to Point as William Boswell uses referring to P Node - don't know which one the RFCs use.)

Cheers

 

[dellboy]

welshguy / shackdaddy

Have either of you ever thought of writing a document on networking/WINS/DNS etc. You both seem to know what your on about and therefore I wondered if either of you ever had, if so where do I find it, if not when are you starting

Cheers

Alternatively whose books do you read.