iis 7 - Intranet/Internet DNS name conflict on windows server

I have an intranet network on which a Windows IIS7 server is named mycompany.com. We also have a website hosted elsewhere named mycompagny.com.

From the outsite of the network, everything is fine for our current use case. But from the inside, it's not possible to access the website in a browser without the www prefix. It return a dummy page from IIS7.

A hack used by a colleague is to skip local DNS routing by using google's DNS service. A major con for the solution is that it have to be configured locally on all machines and that it disable local http serving.

Another hack would be to always use www, but we have some subdomains that are not configured to work with it. For example, our famous: nice-app.mycompagny.com.

I can't just change the intranet server name because it's already used for other purpose as ssh-access-ing a bunch of machines ftp-serving. Renaming mycompagny.com by mycompagny-intranet.com or something else would certainly breaks a lot of things and create headheaches for everyone for a couple of days ... As I am new here, I can't afford it.

How could I handle that specific problem?

This kind of duplicate use of DNS duplicate seem to be a common anti-pattern in the windows server community, at least it have been reported many times on Serverfault:

How could one prevent that to happen again at the design stage of a network?

EDIT: The sub-question is clearly a duplicate of Windows Active Directory naming best practices?.

Comments

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able

Blog

Search This Blog