> Whenever we hear someone is going to "replace" such servers,
> many of us strongly urge you UPGRADE instead and keep it
> simple.

The issue is we're replacing the hardware, so upgrading, while ideal,
isn't in the cards.

> There is no reason it should cause any problems.

My only thinking on three DNS servers involves a comment made by my
manager indicating potential issues with that setup. I couldn't imagine
what applications/services would have a problem with 3 DNS servers;
just slap in the three IPs and be done with it.

> Normally DNS is NOT setup to use NLB or Clustering
> since DNS servers mostly do that based on the way clients
> use the DNS.
> DHCP does NOT deal well with NLB either; it really needs
> clustering.
> Since clustering is on a PER APPLICATION basis (unlike
> NLB which is per node) this works out even if DNS is on
> the same box with the DHCP server.

That was the direction I was heading in my head, I just needed someone
to verify that rationale. Further, is there any documentation that you
are aware of that could me sell this idea to my boss? Well, he
needs to sell it to upper management.

> Is Active Directory involved in any of this?

We are not running Active Directory Integrated DNS servers. We may at
some point, but I cannot find the logic or the need for it. Can you
think of any advantage/disadvantage for doing that? I mean, updating
our DNS tables in a quicker fashion is nice and all, but I see that as
more network overhead than anything else.