Win95 machine not looking at 2nd and 3rd DNS

[nobody]

Kevin Darcy wrote:
> 
> nobody wrote:
> 
> > Hi All
> >
> > I have a Win 95 machine which is set up to look at 3 DNS servers.  The
> > first is our internal, and the second and third are the ISP's.  If I
> > look for a web address, the machine will query only the internal then
> > give up (checked this with a packet sniffer).
> 
> This is working as it is supposed to. The nameserver list in a resolver is
> only for finding a server to answer a query, it is not for getting a second
> or third opinion on how a particular name should resolve. Once a nameserver
> answers the query, then "misson accomplished"; no other nameserver in the
> list is tried.

Bugger.  Thats exactly the characteristic's I require

> One thing this implies, among others, is that unless your ISP's DNS servers
> have *full* knowledge of all of your internal zones, you shouldn't be
> putting them in the resolver configuration of your internal clients at all.
> Otherwise, if your regular nameserver is down, your clients will be
> querying the ISP servers and might get bogus "no such name" responses even
> for names that really exist!
> 
> > The internal DNS is sat on a linux box and serves subdomains beneath our
> > internet registered domain (ie. registed domain foo.com, this box does
> > london.foo.com and paris.foo.com).  The machine has no zone for root".".
> 
> You didn't say whether your clients need to resolve Internet names or not,
> but assuming they do, you need to set up your nameserver to resolve those
> names. If your nameserver has open access to other Internet nameservers,
> then just configure it with the Internet root hints file. If it has no
> direct access to Internet nameservers, or only restricted access, then
> you'll probably have to use forwarding. Maybe your ISP would let you use
> their DNS servers as forwarders?

Don't want to "forward" (see response to Delmer)

> > However, other machines I have seem to work fine (a linux box (not the
> > name server), and an NT box.
> 
> Are their resolvers configured the same way?

Yep, fraid so

Mark