DHCP Server Role Installation writes incorrect registry permissions (first noticed on Server 2008)

Unanswered DHCP Server Role Installation writes incorrect registry permissions (first noticed on Server 2008)

All Replies

  • Wednesday, September 19, 2012 9:25 PM
     
     

    There was a very good question in that other string that was not answered.  Did anybody open a case with Microsoft on this being a problem?  Sometimes errors are picked up from forums like this, but unless the forum is specifically set up as a forum for reporting errors to Microsoft engineering, the assumption is wrong that posting a potential error to a forum is the way to ensure Microsoft works on it.

    If this is a problem in your environment, you really should open a ticket with Microsoft.


    tim

  • Wednesday, September 19, 2012 9:59 PM
     
     

    Well you are right.

    But this issue can be fixed quite easily. So I don't think that it's worth paying fee to open a case with MS support... And I've done my part already by making some research and fixing this error :).

    I just hope that someone with free support-calls will draw MS attention to this problem as it happens on every server with DHCP role. Someone definitely can do that :).


    • Edited by AlexVD Wednesday, September 19, 2012 10:03 PM
    •  
  • Friday, September 21, 2012 5:54 AM
    Moderator
     
     

    Hi,

    Thank you for your question.
    I am trying to involve someone familiar with this topic to further look at this issue. There might be some time delay. Appreciate your patience.

    Thank you for your understanding and support.

    Best Regards,
    Aiden


    Aiden Cao

    TechNet Community Support

  • Friday, September 21, 2012 7:36 AM
     
     

    Hi Alex,

    Here is the KB article which is applied to the issue you get for your reference:

    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2298620

    Hope it could help you.

    Best Regards

    Scott Xie

  • Friday, September 21, 2012 6:41 PM
     
     

    Wow!  That's really strange then.  The fact that Microsoft actually published a workaround for 2008 R2 means they must have a made a conscious decision to ignore implementing this fix in 2012.  It will be interesting to see what Aiden comes back with as the 'official' Microsoft answer. <grin>

    And to AlexVD's point about paying for a call, Microsoft used to not charge for the calls if the problem was with their product.  Has this policy changed?


    tim


  • Saturday, September 22, 2012 11:18 AM
     
     

    Wow...a whole KB article:).

    There was no one at the moment I was looking into this issue :(.

    As for this article - workaround is almost the same. But there is no need to add special permissions for "NT SERVICE\DHCPServer". It works under "NETWORK SERVICE" by itself. DHCP role setup just don't need to change the default permissions.

  • Saturday, September 22, 2012 11:19 AM
     
     
    Is it possible that the artcile was written without consulting with developers?
  • Saturday, September 22, 2012 5:10 PM
     
     
    Highly unlikely.  Microsoft has a very sophisticated problem resolution tracking and review system.  It is pretty hard for anything to fall through the cracks.

    tim

  • Friday, September 28, 2012 3:21 AM
     
     

    Wow!  That's really strange then.  The fact that Microsoft actually published a workaround for 2008 R2 means they must have a made a conscious decision to ignore implementing this fix in 2012.  It will be interesting to see what Aiden comes back with as the 'official' Microsoft answer. <grin>

    And to AlexVD's point about paying for a call, Microsoft used to not charge for the calls if the problem was with their product.  Has this policy changed?


    tim


    Yes, if the problem is caused by the product, Microsoft will not charge it for the case. I suggest that you can create a case to microsoft if you want the issue be thoroughly fixed.

    Best Regards

    Scott Xie

  • Tuesday, October 09, 2012 9:40 PM
    Moderator
     
     
    Are you seeing a lack in the functionality or just that these are being reported to the log?

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/