none
2008 DNS -- IP address sorting issue RRS feed

  • Question

  • I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but I noticed a GUI bug in 2008 Server Manager (or at least it's different than what I expected and was used to in 2003). Under DNS, if you look at a zone for a DNS Server, and display a zone, when you try to sort by IP address, the sorting is not right.

     

    In 2003, if you sorted by the IP addresses in DNS, it went in true descending numerical order:

    192.168.1.220

    192.168.1.123

    192.168.1.23

    192.168.1.20

    192.168.1.10

     

    In the RTM version of 2008, it seems to sort it alphabetically, which is harder to search through visually:

    192.168.1.23

    192.168.1.220

    192.168.1.20

    192.168.1.123

    192.168.1.10

     

    To me, this would not be the expected result, and I was just wondering if anyone else had reported this yet (and if it was changed this way on purpose for some reason).  Let me know if screenshots or any further information is needed.  The same sorting order method can be seen from the DNS console from Administrative Tools, when you go into a Forward Lookup Zone, for example, and click on the Data column to sort by IP address.

    Thursday, February 7, 2008 5:47 AM

Answers

  • RobAbate said:

    I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but I noticed a GUI bug in 2008 Server Manager (or at least it's different than what I expected and was used to in 2003). Under DNS, if you look at a zone for a DNS Server, and display a zone, when you try to sort by IP address, the sorting is not right.

     

    In 2003, if you sorted by the IP addresses in DNS, it went in true descending numerical order:

    192.168.1.220

    192.168.1.123

    192.168.1.23

    192.168.1.20

    192.168.1.10

     

    In the RTM version of 2008, it seems to sort it alphabetically, which is harder to search through visually:

    192.168.1.23

    192.168.1.220

    192.168.1.20

    192.168.1.123

    192.168.1.10

     

    To me, this would not be the expected result, and I was just wondering if anyone else had reported this yet (and if it was changed this way on purpose for some reason).  Let me know if screenshots or any further information is needed.  The same sorting order method can be seen from the DNS console from Administrative Tools, when you go into a Forward Lookup Zone, for example, and click on the Data column to sort by IP address.



    Hi Rob,

    The RTM version of 2008 is also sorting it in decending order, the only catch here is that it is giving preference the ASCII values.

    192.168.1.23      ASCII Values (2 - 50, 3 - 51)

    192.168.1.220    ASCII Values (2 - 50, 2 - 50, 0 - 48)

    192.168.1.20      ASCII Values (2 - 50, 0 - 48)

    192.168.1.123    ASCII Values (1 - 49, 2 - 50, 3 - 51)

    192.168.1.10      ASCII Values (1 - 49, 0 - 48)

    I am sure there is some change in MMC how it sort the things.  As per my recommendation to keep ourself habitual to read and the addresses in this way.  I know its little difficult becuase switching one to another.

    Other way can be exporting it to excel sheet and sort it in whatever way we want.

    Regards,
    Tilak


    IT Consultant
    Monday, November 10, 2008 6:08 PM

All replies

  • Hello,

     

    Could you please tell me your OS version?

     

    You could view your OS version by the following steps:

    Click Start -> click Run -> type 'winver' and press Enter.

    Or, you could type command "systeminfo" in Command Prompt.

     

    Thanks.

     

    Regards,

    Neo Zhu

    Microsoft Online Community Support

     

    Friday, February 8, 2008 6:08 AM
  • Absolutely!  I'm running Windows Server 2008 Enterprise x64 Build 6001 Service Pack 1.

     

    Host Name:                 SERVERCONS
    OS Name:                   Microsoftr Windows Serverr 2008 Enterprise
    OS Version:                6.0.6001 Service Pack 1 Build 6001
    OS Manufacturer:           Microsoft Corporation
    OS Configuration:          Additional/Backup Domain Controller
    OS Build Type:             Multiprocessor Free

     

    I have verified this behavior on a couple of different machines, and it doesn't matter if you use Server Manager or the DNS console.  Perhaps there is a registry key to modify this behavior back to the way Windows 2003 sorts the list?

    Friday, February 8, 2008 3:42 PM
  • It's very stupid bug and it's very annoying.
    And it's still not fixed...

    Tuesday, July 29, 2008 4:48 PM
  • I opened a web incident with Microsoft a couple months ago on this. The tech (Barry) did his best but this is what he ended up with:

    I was able to reproduce the issue in the reverse zone, but not the forward zone.  Looking internally in our tracking databases this was opened for investigation and it was determined that the MMC is working as designed and no change will be made.  So at this time there is no action in place to make this work as it did in 2003.  I will investigate further, but if any change will be made it will be some time before it is done.


    He actually called me and said he'd try to inquire more outside the scope of the trouble ticket (which is very cool of him) but I'm not holding my breath on things happening very quickly if at all.

    "We meant to do that"... sure.... Thanks, Microsoft. I encourage anyone who has the ability to contact Microsoft support to file a ticket for this. Maybe if enough people complain officially, we actually see some results.
    • Proposed as answer by marquismark Friday, January 29, 2010 7:20 PM
    Thursday, October 2, 2008 8:40 PM
  • RobAbate said:

    I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but I noticed a GUI bug in 2008 Server Manager (or at least it's different than what I expected and was used to in 2003). Under DNS, if you look at a zone for a DNS Server, and display a zone, when you try to sort by IP address, the sorting is not right.

     

    In 2003, if you sorted by the IP addresses in DNS, it went in true descending numerical order:

    192.168.1.220

    192.168.1.123

    192.168.1.23

    192.168.1.20

    192.168.1.10

     

    In the RTM version of 2008, it seems to sort it alphabetically, which is harder to search through visually:

    192.168.1.23

    192.168.1.220

    192.168.1.20

    192.168.1.123

    192.168.1.10

     

    To me, this would not be the expected result, and I was just wondering if anyone else had reported this yet (and if it was changed this way on purpose for some reason).  Let me know if screenshots or any further information is needed.  The same sorting order method can be seen from the DNS console from Administrative Tools, when you go into a Forward Lookup Zone, for example, and click on the Data column to sort by IP address.



    Hi Rob,

    The RTM version of 2008 is also sorting it in decending order, the only catch here is that it is giving preference the ASCII values.

    192.168.1.23      ASCII Values (2 - 50, 3 - 51)

    192.168.1.220    ASCII Values (2 - 50, 2 - 50, 0 - 48)

    192.168.1.20      ASCII Values (2 - 50, 0 - 48)

    192.168.1.123    ASCII Values (1 - 49, 2 - 50, 3 - 51)

    192.168.1.10      ASCII Values (1 - 49, 0 - 48)

    I am sure there is some change in MMC how it sort the things.  As per my recommendation to keep ourself habitual to read and the addresses in this way.  I know its little difficult becuase switching one to another.

    Other way can be exporting it to excel sheet and sort it in whatever way we want.

    Regards,
    Tilak


    IT Consultant
    Monday, November 10, 2008 6:08 PM
  • Yeah we discovered the sorting issue with Vista x64, it seemed to affect x64 MMC clients first. We opened cases twice with MS and they blew us off. Clearly their developers never used the product day  in and out to realize how bad the character postiion based sorting is. When you try to find blocks of addresses ina  crowded DNS list it is impossible, we have to export the DNS to a spreasheet or something. Wake up MS this is not an improvement it is a huge step backward!
    Wednesday, April 7, 2010 12:50 PM
  • The real question is: Why would they "mean to do that"? Did they lose the guy that knows how to code a recognition of an IPv4 address, and then convert it to hex, or binary if being silly, in order to sort the column according to the "hidden" value? Or did they just feel like it wasn't worth it, since "no-one" is securing their networks through the basic principle of knowing what is on their network - i.e., using assigned ip addresses, either statically or via dhcp reservations and then monitoring via something like arpwatch. Argh - maybe they decided to torture everyone into IPv6, who knows. It is definitely a step backwards.
    Wednesday, December 1, 2010 9:25 PM
  • The fortune 50 company I work for has just started moving to 2008 and I stumbled onto this bug a few months ago.   Before I found this thread and others on related to the issue dating back to early 2008, I assumed that this must have been an over sight or something broken on my specific install and just a bug report would fix this, QUICKLY.  As others have found, this is not the case.  So then a business case was submitted for this issue.  We have some applications that rely on Microsoft DNS that cost the company in the order of $100,000 per minute when then are down.(I didn't design them.)  My business case simply stated that if it took a administrator 1 extra minute to fix 1 issue because of the sorting issue, or they created an issue because of the miss sorting of the data, the cost would be $100,000.  When you look at DNS replication time a simple mistake that gets replicated through AD could easily be in the millions of dollars.  All because a modern piece of software cannot sort numbers or dates.

    This was not a strong enough business case to justify fixing the broken sort.   It is pretty clear to me that they just don't care.  The business case is not exaggerated in any way and in fact it is probably under stated.  The fact that Microsoft is flat refusing to fix this broken product is absurd and it gets even more bizarre after a valid business case from just one of millions of companies using this product is presented.

    I would suggest that anyone reading this thread go and submit a bug report on the MMC.  Maybe if they get enough, it might get attention.
    Tuesday, May 17, 2011 8:08 PM
  • And I sent a suggestion using Windows Server's Server Manager "Send feedback" button in 2008. After more than two years Microsoft flagged my suggestion as "Won't fix". It's just stupid :-(

    Friday, May 20, 2011 10:54 AM
  • I have encountered the same problem on Windows 2008 R2 as well.  I do not think it is a problem with MMC because this server runs DHCP and DNS.  In the DHCP console, ipv4 addresses are sorted in their natural order.  It's only the DNS sorting that is messed up.

    If Microsoft were on the ball, maybe the fix could have been included in W2k8 SP1.  Has anyone been able to confirm this?

    Dan.


    Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:00 AM
  • I pushed hard enough to get our rep to vaguely, out of the side of his mouth say that there was no development what so ever going on with the DNS MMC, at all, for any reason.  

    Also, I did just run across this gem, for those of you that are trying to trouble shoot issues with this date sorting.

    "The Aging number in the DNS data gives hours since 1/1/1600 00:00."

    So it is stored as a whole number that could easily be sorted.   But really..   HOURS since 1600... Nice.

     

    This link has scripts to convert them into something slightly more useful....

    http://blogs.technet.com/b/networking/archive/2008/05/21/export-dns-records-to-excel-to-read-time-stamps-and-static-records.aspx
    Tuesday, November 1, 2011 9:14 PM
  • The IP's still sort via their ASCII values the DNS MMC(or whatever they renamed it to) in Server 8 beta.  I didn't have the heart to check on the dates.
    Wednesday, April 18, 2012 8:08 PM
  • The IP's still sort via their ASCII values the DNS MMC(or whatever they renamed it to) in Server 8 beta.  I didn't have the heart to check on the dates.

    OMG, third version of Windows Server and still broken. It's so lame...
    Thursday, April 19, 2012 9:25 AM
  • My experience is that it is only the 64bit versions that have this fault.

    Using DNS management console on 2008 or Windows 7 32 bit OS sorts by IP address correctly.

    Friday, June 22, 2012 1:55 AM
  • I am sure there is some change in MMC how it sort the things.  As per my recommendation to keep ourself habitual to read and the addresses in this way.  I know its little difficult becuase switching one to another.

    Oh yeah, when going through hundred of IP addresses, it just a LITTLE difficult.  Damn it!

    It's been several years and the bug is still not fixed.  Is Microsoft too poor to hire qualified software engineers to code correctly?  What's ridiculous is that we don't have this stupid bug in 32bit O/S.


    • Edited by Horinius Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:10 PM
    Friday, November 8, 2013 10:26 AM
  • Funny it's only you mentioning this, but your observance is correct. SO this is neither general MMC, nor irrevocable 64-bit issue, it is a DNS console code BUG!

    Obviously one team/person programmed DHCP and another DNS console. So it is a matter of copy& paste the necessary source code.

    How many hours do you need to fix the code in this manner?

    Lastly how many more decades do we wait for MS to fix it the same way?

    Thursday, May 21, 2015 3:01 PM
  • We can all vote to have the option added to revert to previous sorting behavior:

    http://windowsserver.uservoice.com/forums/295059-networking/suggestions/8065242-fix-dns-management-console-sorting-bug

    Tuesday, May 26, 2015 8:14 PM
  • Seems pretty obvious that they have utter contempt for their customers.  11 years later the same problem remains in Server 2019 and the latest DNS Manager from Windows 10 1903.
    Thursday, September 26, 2019 8:34 PM