Posted: 8/13/2002 1:12:52 PM EDT
|
Anyone here have MS Premier Support, that is willing to submitt a Windows 2000 bug for me? I used to have it at old job, but since I left, no more. |
|
Win2k Pro SP3 Large HOSTS file will cause a system to hang. The HOSTS file will be read and loaded into the DNS Cache. A HOSTS file of 472K will cause the SERVICES.EXE process to consume 100% of CPU resources for an unacceptable amount of time. I have just spent the entire morning searching MS KB and Technet and Google trying to see if anyone has recreated the issue. I might be the first (again). |
|
Guzzler, Sorry bud, but there is nothing on the Premier Support site. I've never heard of anything like this, either. I even tried talking to our dedicated MS parrot heads, and they have no idea. Could I ask why you feel the need for such a huge host file? You need to locate IP's for machines that don't register with DDNS/DNS servers, or sumpin'? |
|
Hey Joe_Black, Basicly I am redirecting addresses back to myself. Ad blocking! Example: # Doubleclick (Netgravity) 127.0.0.1 ad.ae.doubleclick.net 127.0.0.1 ad.ar.doubleclick.net 127.0.0.1 ad.at.doubleclick.net 127.0.0.1 ad.au.doubleclick.be 127.0.0.1 ad.au.doubleclick.net Someone here pointed to a site ([url=http://www.smartin-designs.com/]Host file Information[/url])that has HOSTS files already populated with the known ad sites. I have been trying to load it all morning. Finally got it to work when I turned off the DNS Cache service. I think Mickysoft should be told about this. |
|
Quoted: Couldn't you just create A records in your DNS server for the offending domains? Only if I ran my own DNS server... I have thought about loading up local forwarding DNS server. But then that would be another process I would have to keep track of. Just easier to use my service provider and build a hosts file. |
|
Guzler, Well I can understand how you are able to increase the size of your Hosts file, if you turn off DNS resolving. Without DNS your only option to resolve hosts names within the DNS namespace is either through Hosts files, or broadcasts (provided you OS supports broadcasts and the target host is on the same LAN segment). However, I would agree with BenDover that using DNS zones would be easier, specifically in Windows 2000. The DNS service is very easy to implement, and if most of the ad sites have the same DNS suffix, you only need to create the higher levels of the DNS zones. I run my own DNS service, and don't utilize my ISP's DNS servers. I have the pointer records for the "." servers. By default that is how Windows 2000 DNS service is configured. |
|
I guess I forgot to mention that I got everything to work! Currently using a 472K HOSTS file no problem. But I did have to turn off the "DNS Cache" Service. Standard name resolution is functioning fine, BTW. It is just that the "DNS Cache" service in W2K Pro is something that MS put in to speed things up. To bad it is broken! It is designed to reduce the number of times a client queries a DNS server. Especially if one is returning to a specific location repeately over a short period of time. For some stupid reason the DNS Cache Service loads the HOSTS file into memory on boot up, or when you make a change. Instead of quering the file on demand. Hense the slow down, CPU usage, and increased memory usage. That is why I would like someone to submit the problem to MS. There is a potential that I might get charged by MS if I submit it (god I hate their support process). But if you have Premier support, you can submit a bug for free (well you are already paying for the premier support). |
|
You have to PAY MS to submit bugs to them? Suggestions: 1. Snail mail to an exec: $.37 2. Some MS forum or better yet, USENET group dedicated to MS issues. It would be interesting to know how put attention they pay to the input they get. My guess is that the only hope of it getting resolved is if it gets attention where lots of admins exist who care about W2000. The problem here would seem to be that by now, W2000 may be an official orphan, though from what I hear, XP is buggy. |
|
Duhhh!!! Aaaaa... I forgot about the MS News Servers. Thanks for the reminder! About paying for submitting. MS is weird. If you are the FIRST to submit the bug, no pay. But... if you are not, you end up paying when they tell you the answer when they read it off the Knowledge Base, or Tech Net. It is their way of making sure you go through all the online tools before you waste their time. I used to be able to search their knowledge base really well. But when they changed it over to the new .NET services, I don't get the same results. |
|
i tried that but quickly tired of it. every ad would show a "cannot be displayed" error. and every one of those on a page would generate an additional back button click to go back ot the previous page. so right where ar15.com has the ads up top would show a error. but the rest of the page would work. ive turned IE's cookie managment to prompt me. i permit certian cookies and deny others. no it doesnt get annowing because there is a checkbox that sets it permantly until i go into IE's options and change/remove that entry. sure i still have to deal with the ads, but my cookies are now under control. |
|
Quoted: Duhhh!!! Aaaaa... I forgot about the MS News Servers. Thanks for the reminder! About paying for submitting. MS is weird. If you are the FIRST to submit the bug, no pay. But... if you are not, you end up paying when they tell you the answer when they read it off the Knowledge Base, or Tech Net. It is their way of making sure you go through all the online tools before you waste their time. I used to be able to search their knowledge base really well. But when they changed it over to the new .NET services, I don't get the same results. I [b]Really, really, really[/b] hate the way M$ runs their support Dept. I find a known issue in the damn Q article that you have to call them on to get the update, and they want my CC#; while assuring me, that if it is in fact a known issue it will be refunded. Bullshit. One good loophole though, once you get a tech on the phone , they will usually go through a whole list of small problems I have, and not charge a dime. (It is their job anyway, so they don't care, as long as you're cool with them on the phone) Fraggin M$... they really piss me off. While on this mini rant, I also want to bitch about the lack of documentation. Let's face it ISA server is a bitch, especially when pooling them... Grrrr.... |