I'm working with DDNS both at home and at work using both Unix (Proprietary or Linux) and Win2K. They interoperate fine.
The only issues I've seen are with IXFR implementations (incremental zone transfers) and some "noise" data for some subzones. The workaround is that you can delegate the "noise" zones back over to a Win2K box until the BIND 8.2.1 code is fixed.
The REAL PROBLEM as documented in the story about Boe...oh, the "large aerospace firm" is that many large enterprises segment their IT structure along operating system lines rather than functional lines. It is much more efficient to LOSE operating system religion and use the "appropriate tool" for a job.
The DNS folks where I'm consulting use both Solaris and Win2K systems as nameservers. Solaris hosts the root namespace and the IP management tools. Win2K hosts the Active Directory Integrated delegated zones. The same folks in THE NETWORK GROUP (a functional split not an OS-centric split) manage all of these zones. There is no pissing contest over OS machismo. If more companies were to split their IT into functional areas, rather than OS empires, they might see a better result.
This is a crock! The first thing the Win2K workstation must do is check for an existing name same as it used to do with a NETBIOS claim-name call.
I can only guess that you have overlapping zones of authority in your namespace.
With a proper implementation of BIND (or Win2K DDNS) the conflict is detected, the registration is refused, and the client system will note the conflict in its errorlog.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm working with DDNS both at home and at work using both Unix (Proprietary or Linux) and Win2K. They interoperate fine.
The only issues I've seen are with IXFR implementations (incremental zone transfers) and some "noise" data for some subzones. The workaround is that you can delegate the "noise" zones back over to a Win2K box until the BIND 8.2.1 code is fixed.
The REAL PROBLEM as documented in the story about Boe...oh, the "large aerospace firm" is that many large enterprises segment their IT structure along operating system lines rather than functional lines. It is much more efficient to LOSE operating system religion and use the "appropriate tool" for a job.
The DNS folks where I'm consulting use both Solaris and Win2K systems as nameservers. Solaris hosts the root namespace and the IP management tools. Win2K hosts the Active Directory Integrated delegated zones. The same folks in THE NETWORK GROUP (a functional split not an OS-centric split) manage all of these zones. There is no pissing contest over OS machismo. If more companies were to split their IT into functional areas, rather than OS empires, they might see a better result.
I'll get off my soapbox now. Just my two cents.
Yes, this could be a risk. To address this risk, you are allowed to limit who you accept updates from (in both BIND and WIN2K DDNS).
A Win2K DHCP server can act as a proxy for its clients so that registration of both A and PTR records occurs via the DHCP server, NOT the DHCP client.
Most installations that I've seen only accept updates from the DHCP server, not the individual clients.
This is a crock! The first thing the Win2K workstation must do is check for an existing name same as it used to do with a NETBIOS claim-name call.
I can only guess that you have overlapping zones of authority in your namespace.
With a proper implementation of BIND (or Win2K DDNS) the conflict is detected, the registration is refused, and the client system will note the conflict in its errorlog.