On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 02:39:58AM -0500, Anthony E. Greene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Patrick Nelson wrote:
| >I'm just not sure what is the best way to name systems on the private
| >side of our LAN. We tried using just single names but some programs
| >seem to have problems with it. Like NIS and SendMail. What is the best
| >way to name systems on a LAN behind a firewall that don't have internet
| >names?
|
| I use "localdomain", eg: linuxbox.localdomain.
I use "home". Run a private caching DNS with a "home" domain and run everything of it;
it can do the upstream queries for other domains. Works fine.
BTW, I make a habit of making host records like this:
skaros IN CNAME skaros-hme0.home.
skaros-hme0 IN A 192.168.1.1
IN MX 50 skaros-hme0.home.
janus IN CNAME janus-eth0.home.
janus-eth0 IN A 192.168.1.2
IN MX 50 skaros-hme0.home.
I.e. the "real" FQDN has the interface name in it. Handy when
looking at reports.
--
Cameron Simpson, DoD#743 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zip.com.au/~cs/
I think that is why I like rec.moto; regular posters here have developed
virtual asbestos underwear and it takes a really hot flaming statement, as
opposed to a humorous aside, to start the flame guns going. Well, oK, all
you have to say is "guns" or "constitution" or "Harley" and it starts a flame
war, but that stuff is easy to pick out and ignore ;-).
- Sheryl Katz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
