DNS SUFFIX ENTRIES IN SEARCH ORDER

Hello All:

I need to add a new string in DNS search order, can someone please tell me
how to add a new DNS suffix to DNS search order via DHCP. I need to push
this to all of our client. I am trying to do this on a Windows Server 2003.

Thansk.

"J de Boyne Pollard" <> wrote in message
news:c908da93-fa2c-4ec6-8fef-...
>E> can someone please tell me how to add a new
> E> DNS suffix to DNS search order via DHCP.
>
> No.
>
> E> I need to push this to all of our client.
>
> Tough. It's not possible. Option 119 can be set on the DHCP server,
> but it's largely ignored by most Microsoft DHCP clients. They only
> respect option 15. This task cannot be done with DHCP. So put down
> the chocolate-covered banana and step away from the European currency
> systems. Pick up a group policy, instead.


Option 015 does give the Connection Specific suffix, however I agree the
group policy option is better.

The following article should help.

Configure the DNS Suffix Search List for a Disjoint Namespace ...You can use
the Group Policy Management console (GPMC) to configure the Domain Name
System (DNS) suffix search list. In some Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 ...
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../bb847901.aspx

Ace

"J de Boyne Pollard" <> wrote in message
news:fee7813d-52d7-4027-9391-...
> AF> The following article should help.
>
> Dat's der bunny, as they say. There's also MSKB Q275553.
>
> Of course, in classic left-hand-doesn't-know-what-the-right-hand-is-
> doing style, the Microsoft Office Communications Server people don't
> know that this DHCP option doesn't actually work, or are just assuming
> that it's a defect in Microsoft's DHCP client that's going to be
> fixed, and document it as the official mechanism for doing this:
>
> <URL:http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l...d572752(office.
> 13).aspx>
>
> It *is* a defect that needs fixing, of course. ISC's DHCP client has
> supported this option since version 3.1.0. It's also supported by the
> MacOS 10.5 DHCP client. So recent releases of MacOS 10 and of most
> Linux distributions have this functionality. But Microsoft's
> operating systems do not. The RFC documenting this option has been
> around for seven years, and was co-authored by Bernard Aboba of
> Microsoft.


I haven't tried it, so I can't comment on it. But the GPO works nicely in a
domain scenario with Windows clients. There must have been a reason Option
119 functionality was left out.

Ace