Hi,
I have installed 2 NICs on a Server. One of them is
connected to company's network (IP Address is assigned by
company's DHCP Server). The other one is connected to a
private testing network and I plan to use that server as
AD in the testing LAN.
I would like to know
1) Is it necessary to consider the sequnce of binding of
the NICs ? Company LAN - Local Area Connection and
Private LAN - Local Area Connection 2. Does the sequence
significant ?
2) From my understanding, when we run ipconfig/all, the
first NIC shown is the primary NIC. How can we change the
sequence ?
ThanksFor SQL Server, the order is irrelevant. SQL binds to all valid addresses
that exist at service startup.
Change the binding order for your NICs to change the order they appear in
the IPCONFIG output.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Peter" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:02f001c5ba90$ffdd7e50$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have installed 2 NICs on a Server. One of them is
> connected to company's network (IP Address is assigned by
> company's DHCP Server). The other one is connected to a
> private testing network and I plan to use that server as
> AD in the testing LAN.
> I would like to know
> 1) Is it necessary to consider the sequnce of binding of
> the NICs ? Company LAN - Local Area Connection and
> Private LAN - Local Area Connection 2. Does the sequence
> significant ?
> 2) From my understanding, when we run ipconfig/all, the
> first NIC shown is the primary NIC. How can we change the
> sequence ?
> Thanks
>|||Dear Geoff,
Thank you for your reply. I should have posted it to Windows Server
newsgroup.
However, how do I change the binding order for the NICs ?
Thanks
Peter
"Geoff N. Hiten" <sqlcraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e4ZR9NquFHA.3316@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> For SQL Server, the order is irrelevant. SQL binds to all valid addresses
> that exist at service startup.
> Change the binding order for your NICs to change the order they appear in
> the IPCONFIG output.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Peter" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:02f001c5ba90$ffdd7e50$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have installed 2 NICs on a Server. One of them is
>> connected to company's network (IP Address is assigned by
>> company's DHCP Server). The other one is connected to a
>> private testing network and I plan to use that server as
>> AD in the testing LAN.
>> I would like to know
>> 1) Is it necessary to consider the sequnce of binding of
>> the NICs ? Company LAN - Local Area Connection and
>> Private LAN - Local Area Connection 2. Does the sequence
>> significant ?
>> 2) From my understanding, when we run ipconfig/all, the
>> first NIC shown is the primary NIC. How can we change the
>> sequence ?
>> Thanks
>|||This may vary slightly by OS version.
On the Network Connections page, Select ADVANCED | Advanced Settings on the
menu. First page should be Adapters and Bindings. Change the order as you
need to.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Peter" <Peter@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:uhbAlqquFHA.3792@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Dear Geoff,
> Thank you for your reply. I should have posted it to Windows Server
> newsgroup.
> However, how do I change the binding order for the NICs ?
> Thanks
> Peter
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <sqlcraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e4ZR9NquFHA.3316@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> For SQL Server, the order is irrelevant. SQL binds to all valid
>> addresses that exist at service startup.
>> Change the binding order for your NICs to change the order they appear in
>> the IPCONFIG output.
>> --
>> Geoff N. Hiten
>> Senior Database Administrator
>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>> "Peter" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:02f001c5ba90$ffdd7e50$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have installed 2 NICs on a Server. One of them is
>> connected to company's network (IP Address is assigned by
>> company's DHCP Server). The other one is connected to a
>> private testing network and I plan to use that server as
>> AD in the testing LAN.
>> I would like to know
>> 1) Is it necessary to consider the sequnce of binding of
>> the NICs ? Company LAN - Local Area Connection and
>> Private LAN - Local Area Connection 2. Does the sequence
>> significant ?
>> 2) From my understanding, when we run ipconfig/all, the
>> first NIC shown is the primary NIC. How can we change the
>> sequence ?
>> Thanks
>>
>
Showing posts with label connected. Show all posts
Showing posts with label connected. Show all posts
Monday, March 12, 2012
Nic Card Preferences
WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
Any help greatly appreciated
Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-4b9d-8a34-2dbf6ac0f4551033.mspx?mfr=true
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegr oups.com...
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>
|||eric.c.smith@.gmail.com wrote in news:1178897412.102618.129760
@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>
You will need to configure explicit routes in and for the three servers.
From the Command Prompt, ROUTE PRINT will display the current route table.
ROUTE on its own displays a short help. IMHO it's a bit of an arcane art
...
BTW the route table is applicable to the whole computer - as far as I am
aware, you can't do what you require selectively by process.
|||On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-...
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> MicrosoftSQLServerMVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Geoff,
Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
|||Hosts files will work just fine. Think of DNS as a service-based central
hosts file.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegro ups.com...
> On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>
|||<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegro ups.com...
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
Yes.
>
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
|||On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>
>
> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Thank you all for your replies
> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
> current srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Private Lan
> Connection #2
> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.1.1.1
> (connection to x4)
> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.3
> (connection to x4)
> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.4
> (connection to x3)
> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
> above.
> new srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
> new srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
> new srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
trying to do?
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2b
1.1.1.1 srvx2c
2.1.1.3 srvx3b
3.1.1.3 srvx3c
1.1.1.3 srvx4b
3.1.1.4 srvx4c
Thanks all!
|||I usually go with this:
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
issues.
For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
> what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
> trying to do?
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
> Thanks all!
>
|||On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> I usually go with this:
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
> Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
> alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
> issues.
> For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
> I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
> the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
> forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
proplerly...
"One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
srvx3.wire.dbo.batches(maxed)
So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches(one too many)
All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!
|||Use [Servername.SuffixName].Database.Schema.Object and it will resolve
correctly within SQL.
Square brackets are your friend.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1179435475.288996.61950@.q23g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
> On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
> from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
> proplerly...
> "One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
> reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
> srvx3.wire.dbo.batches (maxed)
> So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
> reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
> srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches (one too many)
> All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
> THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!
>
files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
Any help greatly appreciated
Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-4b9d-8a34-2dbf6ac0f4551033.mspx?mfr=true
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegr oups.com...
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>
|||eric.c.smith@.gmail.com wrote in news:1178897412.102618.129760
@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>
You will need to configure explicit routes in and for the three servers.
From the Command Prompt, ROUTE PRINT will display the current route table.
ROUTE on its own displays a short help. IMHO it's a bit of an arcane art
...
BTW the route table is applicable to the whole computer - as far as I am
aware, you can't do what you require selectively by process.
|||On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-...
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> MicrosoftSQLServerMVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Geoff,
Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
|||Hosts files will work just fine. Think of DNS as a service-based central
hosts file.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegro ups.com...
> On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>
|||<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegro ups.com...
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
Yes.
>
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
|||On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>
>
> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Thank you all for your replies
> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
> current srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Private Lan
> Connection #2
> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.1.1.1
> (connection to x4)
> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.3
> (connection to x4)
> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.4
> (connection to x3)
> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
> above.
> new srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
> new srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
> new srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
trying to do?
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2b
1.1.1.1 srvx2c
2.1.1.3 srvx3b
3.1.1.3 srvx3c
1.1.1.3 srvx4b
3.1.1.4 srvx4c
Thanks all!
|||I usually go with this:
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
issues.
For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
> what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
> trying to do?
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
> Thanks all!
>
|||On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> I usually go with this:
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
> Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
> alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
> issues.
> For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
> I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
> the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
> forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
proplerly...
"One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
srvx3.wire.dbo.batches(maxed)
So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches(one too many)
All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!
|||Use [Servername.SuffixName].Database.Schema.Object and it will resolve
correctly within SQL.
Square brackets are your friend.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1179435475.288996.61950@.q23g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
> On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
> from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
> proplerly...
> "One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
> reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
> srvx3.wire.dbo.batches (maxed)
> So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
> reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
> srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches (one too many)
> All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
> THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!
>
Nic Card Preferences
WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
Any help greatly appreciatedYes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-4b9d-8a34-2dbf6ac0f4551033.mspx?mfr=true
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>|||eric.c.smith@.gmail.com wrote in news:1178897412.102618.129760
@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>
You will need to configure explicit routes in and for the three servers.
From the Command Prompt, ROUTE PRINT will display the current route table.
ROUTE on its own displays a short help. IMHO it's a bit of an arcane art
...
BTW the route table is applicable to the whole computer - as far as I am
aware, you can't do what you require selectively by process.|||On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-...
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> MicrosoftSQLServerMVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > WE have threesqlservers that talk to each other and pass text
> > files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> > cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> > run that we want tousea specific connection (crossover) to a
> > specificsqlserver, but theserveris choosing tousethe lan
> > connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> > specifically pointed tousethe crossover connection. Is there a way
> > toforceeachsqlservertousea specific connection when
> > communicating or transfering files from onesqlserverto another?
> > Any help greatly appreciated- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Geoff,
Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
me to in this article and do it using hosts files?|||Hosts files will work just fine. Think of DNS as a service-based central
hosts file.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain
>> suffix.http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-...
>> --
>> Geoff N. Hiten
>> Senior Database Administrator
>> MicrosoftSQLServerMVP
>> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > WE have threesqlservers that talk to each other and pass text
>> > files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
>> > cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
>> > run that we want tousea specific connection (crossover) to a
>> > specificsqlserver, but theserveris choosing tousethe lan
>> > connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
>> > specifically pointed tousethe crossover connection. Is there a way
>> > toforceeachsqlservertousea specific connection when
>> > communicating or transfering files from onesqlserverto another?
>> > Any help greatly appreciated- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>|||<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
Yes.
>
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html|||On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
<mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> > Geoff,
> > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
> Yes.
>
> --
> Greg Moore
> SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
Thank you all for your replies
If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
current srvx2 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
current srvx3 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
current srvx4 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Private Lan
Connection #2
srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.1.1.1
(connection to x4)
srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.3
(connection to x4)
srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.4
(connection to x3)
I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
above.
new srvx2 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2
1.1.1.1 srvx2
new srvx3 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.3 srvx3
3.1.1.3 srvx3
new srvx4 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
1.1.1.3 srvx4
3.1.1.4 srvx4
I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
again appreciate all your help!|||On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>
>
> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
> > <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> > > Geoff,
> > > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> > > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> > > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> > > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> > > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
> > Yes.
> > --
> > Greg Moore
> > SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> > Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
> Thank you all for your replies
> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
> current srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Private Lan
> Connection #2
> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.1.1.1
> (connection to x4)
> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.3
> (connection to x4)
> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.4
> (connection to x3)
> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
> above.
> new srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
> new srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
> new srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
trying to do?
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2b
1.1.1.1 srvx2c
2.1.1.3 srvx3b
3.1.1.3 srvx3c
1.1.1.3 srvx4b
3.1.1.4 srvx4c
Thanks all!|||I usually go with this:
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
issues.
For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
>> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>>
>>
>> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
>> > <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> > > Geoff,
>> > > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
>> > > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
>> > > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
>> > > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you
>> > > referenced
>> > > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>> > Yes.
>> > --
>> > Greg Moore
>> > SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
>> > Email: sql (at) greenms.com
>> > http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
>> Thank you all for your replies
>> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
>> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
>> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
>> current srvx2 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> current srvx3 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> current srvx4 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1
>> Private Lan
>> Connection #2
>> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3)
>> 1.1.1.1
>> (connection to x4)
>> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
>> 3.1.1.3
>> (connection to x4)
>> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
>> 3.1.1.4
>> (connection to x3)
>> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
>> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
>> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
>> above.
>> new srvx2 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
>> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
>> new srvx3 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
>> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
>> new srvx4 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
>> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
>> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
>> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
> what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
> trying to do?
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
> Thanks all!
>|||On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> I usually go with this:
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
> Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
> alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
> issues.
> For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
> I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
> the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
> forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> >> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
> >> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
> >> > <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> >> > > Geoff,
> >> > > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> >> > > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> >> > > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> >> > > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you
> >> > > referenced
> >> > > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
> >> > Yes.
> >> > --
> >> > Greg Moore
> >> > SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> >> > Email: sql (at) greenms.com
> >> >http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
> >> Thank you all for your replies
> >> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
> >> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
> >> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
> >> current srvx2 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> current srvx3 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> current srvx4 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1
> >> Private Lan
> >> Connection #2
> >> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3)
> >> 1.1.1.1
> >> (connection to x4)
> >> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
> >> 3.1.1.3
> >> (connection to x4)
> >> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
> >> 3.1.1.4
> >> (connection to x3)
> >> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
> >> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
> >> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
> >> above.
> >> new srvx2 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
> >> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
> >> new srvx3 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
> >> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
> >> new srvx4 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
> >> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
> >> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
> >> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
> >> - Show quoted text -
> > After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
> > what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
> > trying to do?
> > 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> > 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> > 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> > 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
> > 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
> > 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
> > 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
> > 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
> > 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
> > Thanks all!- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
proplerly...
"One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
srvx3.wire.dbo.batches (maxed)
So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches (one too many)
All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!|||Use [Servername.SuffixName].Database.Schema.Object and it will resolve
correctly within SQL.
Square brackets are your friend.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1179435475.288996.61950@.q23g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
>> I usually go with this:
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> 2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
>> 1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
>> 2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
>> 3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
>> 1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
>> 3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
>> Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying
>> to
>> alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
>> issues.
>> For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to
>> srvx3.
>> I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still
>> have
>> the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
>> forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
>> --
>> Geoff N. Hiten
>> Senior Database Administrator
>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>> >> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
>> >> > <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> >> > > Geoff,
>> >> > > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times
>> >> > > now)
>> >> > > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
>> >> > > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
>> >> > > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you
>> >> > > referenced
>> >> > > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>> >> > Yes.
>> >> > --
>> >> > Greg Moore
>> >> > SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
>> >> > Email: sql (at) greenms.com
>> >> >http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
>> >> Thank you all for your replies
>> >> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
>> >> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
>> >> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
>> >> current srvx2 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> current srvx3 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> current srvx4 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1
>> >> Private Lan
>> >> Connection #2
>> >> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3)
>> >> 1.1.1.1
>> >> (connection to x4)
>> >> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
>> >> 3.1.1.3
>> >> (connection to x4)
>> >> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
>> >> 3.1.1.4
>> >> (connection to x3)
>> >> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
>> >> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
>> >> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
>> >> above.
>> >> new srvx2 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
>> >> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
>> >> new srvx3 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
>> >> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
>> >> new srvx4 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
>> >> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
>> >> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
>> >> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>> > After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
>> > what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
>> > trying to do?
>> > 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> > 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> > 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> > 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
>> > 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
>> > 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
>> > 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
>> > 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
>> > 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
>> > Thanks all!- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
> from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
> proplerly...
> "One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
> reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
> srvx3.wire.dbo.batches (maxed)
> So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
> reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
> srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches (one too many)
> All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
> THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!
>
files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
Any help greatly appreciatedYes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-4b9d-8a34-2dbf6ac0f4551033.mspx?mfr=true
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>|||eric.c.smith@.gmail.com wrote in news:1178897412.102618.129760
@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>
You will need to configure explicit routes in and for the three servers.
From the Command Prompt, ROUTE PRINT will display the current route table.
ROUTE on its own displays a short help. IMHO it's a bit of an arcane art
...
BTW the route table is applicable to the whole computer - as far as I am
aware, you can't do what you require selectively by process.|||On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-...
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> MicrosoftSQLServerMVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > WE have threesqlservers that talk to each other and pass text
> > files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> > cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> > run that we want tousea specific connection (crossover) to a
> > specificsqlserver, but theserveris choosing tousethe lan
> > connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> > specifically pointed tousethe crossover connection. Is there a way
> > toforceeachsqlservertousea specific connection when
> > communicating or transfering files from onesqlserverto another?
> > Any help greatly appreciated- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Geoff,
Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
me to in this article and do it using hosts files?|||Hosts files will work just fine. Think of DNS as a service-based central
hosts file.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain
>> suffix.http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/9b3661c8-bf60-...
>> --
>> Geoff N. Hiten
>> Senior Database Administrator
>> MicrosoftSQLServerMVP
>> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > WE have threesqlservers that talk to each other and pass text
>> > files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
>> > cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
>> > run that we want tousea specific connection (crossover) to a
>> > specificsqlserver, but theserveris choosing tousethe lan
>> > connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
>> > specifically pointed tousethe crossover connection. Is there a way
>> > toforceeachsqlservertousea specific connection when
>> > communicating or transfering files from onesqlserverto another?
>> > Any help greatly appreciated- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>|||<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
Yes.
>
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html|||On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
<mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> > Geoff,
> > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
> Yes.
>
> --
> Greg Moore
> SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
Thank you all for your replies
If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
current srvx2 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
current srvx3 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
current srvx4 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Private Lan
Connection #2
srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.1.1.1
(connection to x4)
srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.3
(connection to x4)
srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.4
(connection to x3)
I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
above.
new srvx2 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2
1.1.1.1 srvx2
new srvx3 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.3 srvx3
3.1.1.3 srvx3
new srvx4 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
1.1.1.3 srvx4
3.1.1.4 srvx4
I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
again appreciate all your help!|||On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>
>
> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
> > <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> > > Geoff,
> > > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> > > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> > > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> > > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> > > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
> > Yes.
> > --
> > Greg Moore
> > SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> > Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
> Thank you all for your replies
> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
> current srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Private Lan
> Connection #2
> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.1.1.1
> (connection to x4)
> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.3
> (connection to x4)
> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.4
> (connection to x3)
> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
> above.
> new srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
> new srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
> new srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
trying to do?
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2b
1.1.1.1 srvx2c
2.1.1.3 srvx3b
3.1.1.3 srvx3c
1.1.1.3 srvx4b
3.1.1.4 srvx4c
Thanks all!|||I usually go with this:
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
issues.
For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
>> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>>
>>
>> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
>> > <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> > > Geoff,
>> > > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
>> > > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
>> > > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
>> > > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you
>> > > referenced
>> > > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>> > Yes.
>> > --
>> > Greg Moore
>> > SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
>> > Email: sql (at) greenms.com
>> > http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
>> Thank you all for your replies
>> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
>> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
>> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
>> current srvx2 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> current srvx3 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> current srvx4 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1
>> Private Lan
>> Connection #2
>> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3)
>> 1.1.1.1
>> (connection to x4)
>> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
>> 3.1.1.3
>> (connection to x4)
>> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
>> 3.1.1.4
>> (connection to x3)
>> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
>> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
>> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
>> above.
>> new srvx2 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
>> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
>> new srvx3 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
>> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
>> new srvx4 hosts file
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
>> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
>> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
>> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
> what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
> trying to do?
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
> Thanks all!
>|||On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> I usually go with this:
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
> Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
> alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
> issues.
> For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
> I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
> the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
> forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> >> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
> >> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
> >> > <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> >> > > Geoff,
> >> > > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> >> > > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> >> > > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> >> > > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you
> >> > > referenced
> >> > > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
> >> > Yes.
> >> > --
> >> > Greg Moore
> >> > SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> >> > Email: sql (at) greenms.com
> >> >http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
> >> Thank you all for your replies
> >> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
> >> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
> >> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
> >> current srvx2 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> current srvx3 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> current srvx4 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1
> >> Private Lan
> >> Connection #2
> >> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3)
> >> 1.1.1.1
> >> (connection to x4)
> >> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
> >> 3.1.1.3
> >> (connection to x4)
> >> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
> >> 3.1.1.4
> >> (connection to x3)
> >> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
> >> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
> >> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
> >> above.
> >> new srvx2 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
> >> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
> >> new srvx3 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
> >> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
> >> new srvx4 hosts file
> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> >> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
> >> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
> >> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
> >> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
> >> - Show quoted text -
> > After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
> > what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
> > trying to do?
> > 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> > 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> > 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> > 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
> > 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
> > 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
> > 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
> > 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
> > 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
> > Thanks all!- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
proplerly...
"One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
srvx3.wire.dbo.batches (maxed)
So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches (one too many)
All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!|||Use [Servername.SuffixName].Database.Schema.Object and it will resolve
correctly within SQL.
Square brackets are your friend.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1179435475.288996.61950@.q23g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
>> I usually go with this:
>> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> 2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
>> 1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
>> 2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
>> 3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
>> 1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
>> 3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
>> Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying
>> to
>> alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
>> issues.
>> For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to
>> srvx3.
>> I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still
>> have
>> the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
>> forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
>> --
>> Geoff N. Hiten
>> Senior Database Administrator
>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>> >> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
>> >> > <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> >> > > Geoff,
>> >> > > Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times
>> >> > > now)
>> >> > > and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
>> >> > > addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
>> >> > > communicate between them. can I still use the solution you
>> >> > > referenced
>> >> > > me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>> >> > Yes.
>> >> > --
>> >> > Greg Moore
>> >> > SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
>> >> > Email: sql (at) greenms.com
>> >> >http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
>> >> Thank you all for your replies
>> >> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
>> >> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
>> >> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
>> >> current srvx2 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> current srvx3 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> current srvx4 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1
>> >> Private Lan
>> >> Connection #2
>> >> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3)
>> >> 1.1.1.1
>> >> (connection to x4)
>> >> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
>> >> 3.1.1.3
>> >> (connection to x4)
>> >> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2)
>> >> 3.1.1.4
>> >> (connection to x3)
>> >> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
>> >> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
>> >> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
>> >> above.
>> >> new srvx2 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
>> >> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
>> >> new srvx3 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
>> >> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
>> >> new srvx4 hosts file
>> >> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> >> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> >> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> >> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
>> >> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
>> >> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
>> >> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>> > After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
>> > what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
>> > trying to do?
>> > 170.20.50.11 srvx2
>> > 170.20.50.12 srvx3
>> > 170.20.50.13 srvx4
>> > 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
>> > 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
>> > 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
>> > 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
>> > 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
>> > 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
>> > Thanks all!- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
> from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
> proplerly...
> "One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
> reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
> srvx3.wire.dbo.batches (maxed)
> So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
> reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
> srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches (one too many)
> All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
> THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!
>
Nic Card Preferences
WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
Any help greatly appreciatedYes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windo...3.mspx?mfr=true
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>|||eric.c.smith@.gmail.com wrote in news:1178897412.102618.129760
@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>
You will need to configure explicit routes in and for the three servers.
From the Command Prompt, ROUTE PRINT will display the current route table.
ROUTE on its own displays a short help. IMHO it's a bit of an arcane art
...
BTW the route table is applicable to the whole computer - as far as I am
aware, you can't do what you require selectively by process.|||On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.http://technet
2.microsoft.c...3661c8-bf60-...
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> MicrosoftSQLServerMVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Geoff,
Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
me to in this article and do it using hosts files?|||Hosts files will work just fine. Think of DNS as a service-based central
hosts file.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>|||<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
Yes.
>
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html|||On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
<mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Yes.
>
> --
> Greg Moore
> SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html[/vbco
l]
Thank you all for your replies
If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
current srvx2 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
current srvx3 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
current srvx4 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Private Lan
Connection #2
srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.1.1.1
(connection to x4)
srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.3
(connection to x4)
srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.4
(connection to x3)
I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
above.
new srvx2 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2
1.1.1.1 srvx2
new srvx3 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.3 srvx3
3.1.1.3 srvx3
new srvx4 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
1.1.1.3 srvx4
3.1.1.4 srvx4
I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
again appreciate all your help!|||On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>
>
> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you all for your replies
> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
> current srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Pr
ivate Lan
> Connection #2
> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.
1.1.1
> (connection to x4)
> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.
1.1.3
> (connection to x4)
> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.
1.1.4
> (connection to x3)
> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
> above.
> new srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
> new srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
> new srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
trying to do?
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2b
1.1.1.1 srvx2c
2.1.1.3 srvx3b
3.1.1.3 srvx3c
1.1.1.3 srvx4b
3.1.1.4 srvx4c
Thanks all!|||I usually go with this:
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
issues.
For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
> what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
> trying to do?
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
> Thanks all!
>|||On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> I usually go with this:
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
> Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
> alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
> issues.
> For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3
.
> I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
> the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
> forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
proplerly...
"One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
srvx3.wire.dbo.batches (maxed)
So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches (one too many)
All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!
files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
Any help greatly appreciatedYes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windo...3.mspx?mfr=true
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>|||eric.c.smith@.gmail.com wrote in news:1178897412.102618.129760
@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
> WE have three sql servers that talk to each other and pass text
> files. All three are connected to the lan and also have GB crossover
> cables connecting them to each other. We have certain processes that
> run that we want to use a specific connection (crossover) to a
> specific sql server, but the server is choosing to use the lan
> connection rather than the crossover connection even when it is
> specifically pointed to use the crossover connection. Is there a way
> to force each sql server to use a specific connection when
> communicating or transfering files from one sql server to another?
> Any help greatly appreciated
>
You will need to configure explicit routes in and for the three servers.
From the Command Prompt, ROUTE PRINT will display the current route table.
ROUTE on its own displays a short help. IMHO it's a bit of an arcane art
...
BTW the route table is applicable to the whole computer - as far as I am
aware, you can't do what you require selectively by process.|||On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes. The technique is called a connection-specific domain suffix.http://technet
2.microsoft.c...3661c8-bf60-...
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> MicrosoftSQLServerMVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178897412.102618.129760@.y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Geoff,
Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
me to in this article and do it using hosts files?|||Hosts files will work just fine. Think of DNS as a service-based central
hosts file.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 10:37 am, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
>|||<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> Geoff,
> Thanks for your quick reply. I read the article (about 3 times now)
> and will see if that will help. These servers have natted IP
> addresses since they are behind a firewall. We use hosts file to
> communicate between them. can I still use the solution you referenced
> me to in this article and do it using hosts files?
Yes.
>
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html|||On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
<mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178900235.067952.185940@.y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Yes.
>
> --
> Greg Moore
> SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html[/vbco
l]
Thank you all for your replies
If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
current srvx2 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
current srvx3 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
current srvx4 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Private Lan
Connection #2
srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.1.1.1
(connection to x4)
srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.3
(connection to x4)
srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.1.1.4
(connection to x3)
I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
above.
new srvx2 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2
1.1.1.1 srvx2
new srvx3 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.3 srvx3
3.1.1.3 srvx3
new srvx4 hosts file
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
1.1.1.3 srvx4
3.1.1.4 srvx4
I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
again appreciate all your help!|||On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> On May 11, 11:34 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
>
>
> <mooregr_deletet...@.greenms.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you all for your replies
> If I wanted to use a host file for this would how would this work?
> The first three in each hosts file is for LAN connectivity, the
> additional ones are for private crossover connections between servers
> current srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> current srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> servername connection to network Private lan connection#1 Pr
ivate Lan
> Connection #2
> srvx2 170.20.50.11 (lan) 2.1.1.2 (connection to x3) 1.
1.1.1
> (connection to x4)
> srvx3 170.20.50.12 (lan) 2.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.
1.1.3
> (connection to x4)
> srvx4 170.20.50.13 (lan) 1.1.1.3 (connection to x2) 3.
1.1.4
> (connection to x3)
> I am not sure what to add to each host file and how it will
> differentiate between them. These private IP's are not registered in
> a DNS zone. The servers use the hosts file like the examples I have
> above.
> new srvx2 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2
> new srvx3 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3
> new srvx4 hosts file
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4
> I am not sure how to differentiate between the ip addresses, once
> again appreciate all your help!- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
trying to do?
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2b
1.1.1.1 srvx2c
2.1.1.3 srvx3b
3.1.1.3 srvx3c
1.1.1.3 srvx4b
3.1.1.4 srvx4c
Thanks all!|||I usually go with this:
170.20.50.11 srvx2
170.20.50.12 srvx3
170.20.50.13 srvx4
2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
issues.
For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3.
I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<eric.c.smith@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 1:07 pm, eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> After researching a bit on "friendly names for hosts files this is
> what I came up with...Does this look like it will accomplish what I am
> trying to do?
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2b
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2c
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3b
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3c
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4b
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4c
> Thanks all!
>|||On May 11, 2:46 pm, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> I usually go with this:
> 170.20.50.11 srvx2
> 170.20.50.12 srvx3
> 170.20.50.13 srvx4
> 2.1.1.2 srvx2.Priv1
> 1.1.1.1 srvx2.priv2
> 2.1.1.3 srvx3.priv1
> 3.1.1.3 srvx3.priv2
> 1.1.1.3 srvx4.priv1
> 3.1.1.4 srvx4.priv2
> Where each subnet has a connection-specific DNS suffix. You are trying to
> alias a servername to a connection, which can have some authentication
> issues.
> For example, I want to use the Priv1 network to backup from srvx2 to srvx3
.
> I would reference servx3 as servx3.priv1, and it would work. I still have
> the same network name, and all my authentication stuff works, but I am
> forcing traffic across a specific subnet.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> <eric.c.sm...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1178912150.700412.190180@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Looks like this worked like a champ, there was one thing to consider
from this however that our developer had to tweak to make this work
proplerly...
"One caveat, SQL Server has a limit on extensions that you can use to
reference external tables from a query to a linked server:
srvx3.wire.dbo.batches (maxed)
So, when you add a dot to the host file reference it breaks the remote
reference possibility because there are to many extensions:
srvx3.priv1.wire.dbo.batches (one too many)
All I did was change the host name(s) to SRVX3P1
THANKS AGAIN ALL FOR YOUR HELP!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)