SBS 2008 R2 - one or two NICs?

SBS 2008 R2 - Intel XEON quad, 2 NIC MB
NIC #1 WAN -> 192.168.1.3
NIC #2 LAN -> 192.168.16.xxx

I am building SBS 2008 R2 as a replacement for SBS 2003 R2 on a new system
box.

In the configuration, Connect to the Internet, the wizard finds the NIC #1
connected to the router and in Network and Sharing Center, it is labeled
WAN. The NIC #2 is labeled as the LAN.

However, in DHCP, the scope is on the WAN not the LAN; scope for
(192.168.1.xxx). In SBS 2003, the scope is on the LAN side (192.168.16.xxx).
Why would the internal clients have an external address?

My question is, is this correct. If not, how do I create the DHCP scope for
the LAN side. The DHCP panel does not allow for the addition of a new scope.

--

*****************
John Lenz

On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 07:38:34 -0500, "John L" <>
wrote:

>SBS 2008 R2 - Intel XEON quad, 2 NIC MB
>NIC #1 WAN -> 192.168.1.3
>NIC #2 LAN -> 192.168.16.xxx
>
>I am building SBS 2008 R2 as a replacement for SBS 2003 R2 on a new system
>box.
>
>In the configuration, Connect to the Internet, the wizard finds the NIC #1
>connected to the router and in Network and Sharing Center, it is labeled
>WAN. The NIC #2 is labeled as the LAN.
>
>However, in DHCP, the scope is on the WAN not the LAN; scope for
>(192.168.1.xxx). In SBS 2003, the scope is on the LAN side (192.168.16.xxx).
>Why would the internal clients have an external address?
>
>My question is, is this correct. If not, how do I create the DHCP scope for
>the LAN side. The DHCP panel does not allow for the addition of a new scope.


Hi John,

I think it's actually SBS 2008, not SBS 2008 R2. The R2 version is
stil in beta.

Also, SBS2008 is designed to work with a single NIC, which is
different to SBS 2003. In fact if SBS 2008 Setup detects multiple NICs
it will disable all but one.

So your DHCP is actually on the LAN side after all.



Jim

Thanks Jim for the update.

I just want to remark as to how this 1 NIC scenario more secure than the SBS
2003 2 NIC with separation?

--

*****************
John Lenz


"Jim" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 07:38:34 -0500, "John L" <>
> wrote:
>
>>SBS 2008 R2 - Intel XEON quad, 2 NIC MB
>>NIC #1 WAN -> 192.168.1.3
>>NIC #2 LAN -> 192.168.16.xxx
>>
>>I am building SBS 2008 R2 as a replacement for SBS 2003 R2 on a new system
>>box.
>>
>>In the configuration, Connect to the Internet, the wizard finds the NIC #1
>>connected to the router and in Network and Sharing Center, it is labeled
>>WAN. The NIC #2 is labeled as the LAN.
>>
>>However, in DHCP, the scope is on the WAN not the LAN; scope for
>>(192.168.1.xxx). In SBS 2003, the scope is on the LAN side
>>(192.168.16.xxx).
>>Why would the internal clients have an external address?
>>
>>My question is, is this correct. If not, how do I create the DHCP scope
>>for
>>the LAN side. The DHCP panel does not allow for the addition of a new
>>scope.
>
>
> Hi John,
>
> I think it's actually SBS 2008, not SBS 2008 R2. The R2 version is
> stil in beta.
>
> Also, SBS2008 is designed to work with a single NIC, which is
> different to SBS 2003. In fact if SBS 2008 Setup detects multiple NICs
> it will disable all but one.
>
> So your DHCP is actually on the LAN side after all.
>
>
>
> Jim

It isn't more secure. You need a good commercial grade firewall at the edge
for sure now.

"John L" <> wrote in message
news:25695F99-932B-460B-A6F0-...
> Thanks Jim for the update.
>
> I just want to remark as to how this 1 NIC scenario more secure than the
> SBS 2003 2 NIC with separation?
>
> --
>
> *****************
> John Lenz
>
>
> "Jim" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 07:38:34 -0500, "John L" <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>SBS 2008 R2 - Intel XEON quad, 2 NIC MB
>>>NIC #1 WAN -> 192.168.1.3
>>>NIC #2 LAN -> 192.168.16.xxx
>>>
>>>I am building SBS 2008 R2 as a replacement for SBS 2003 R2 on a new
>>>system
>>>box.
>>>
>>>In the configuration, Connect to the Internet, the wizard finds the NIC
>>>#1
>>>connected to the router and in Network and Sharing Center, it is labeled
>>>WAN. The NIC #2 is labeled as the LAN.
>>>
>>>However, in DHCP, the scope is on the WAN not the LAN; scope for
>>>(192.168.1.xxx). In SBS 2003, the scope is on the LAN side
>>>(192.168.16.xxx).
>>>Why would the internal clients have an external address?
>>>
>>>My question is, is this correct. If not, how do I create the DHCP scope
>>>for
>>>the LAN side. The DHCP panel does not allow for the addition of a new
>>>scope.
>>
>>
>> Hi John,
>>
>> I think it's actually SBS 2008, not SBS 2008 R2. The R2 version is
>> stil in beta.
>>
>> Also, SBS2008 is designed to work with a single NIC, which is
>> different to SBS 2003. In fact if SBS 2008 Setup detects multiple NICs
>> it will disable all but one.
>>
>> So your DHCP is actually on the LAN side after all.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jim
>

> "John L" <> wrote in message
>>
>> I just want to remark as to how this 1 NIC scenario more secure than the
>> SBS 2003 2 NIC with separation?
>>
"SteveB" <> schreef in bericht
news:...
> It isn't more secure. You need a good commercial grade firewall at the
> edge for sure now.

Which makes it more secure than a software firewall in your server with 2
NIC's

Incorrect... 2 NICS is most secure.. there is nothing externally that can
jump from one IP range to another

Single NIC scenario, get past router and you are dead, LAN available.

2 NIC scenario, get past router and cant go anywhere on LAN


"Pino" <.@.> wrote in message
news:4c7a1f02$0$14132$...
>> "John L" <> wrote in message
>>>
>>> I just want to remark as to how this 1 NIC scenario more secure than the
>>> SBS 2003 2 NIC with separation?
>>>
> "SteveB" <> schreef in bericht
> news:...
>> It isn't more secure. You need a good commercial grade firewall at the
>> edge for sure now.
>
> Which makes it more secure than a software firewall in your server with 2
> NIC's

In article <>, ooops@daisy.123
says...
> Incorrect... 2 NICS is most secure.. there is nothing externally that can
> jump from one IP range to another
>

Not actually true in real life, in many cases.

In many cases, because of using dual nics, the user configuring the
network often screws up rules that allow the system to be compromised.

Even MS doesn't recommend that a Firewall be installed on a domain
controller, the idea of adding the MS Firewall product was just for SBS
and violated all that MS preached before adding it into SBS.


--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
(remove 999 for proper email address)