Re: [SLUG] DHCP or BIND

From: R P Herrold (herrold@owlriver.com)
Date: Fri Feb 15 2002 - 18:45:39 EST


On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Paul M Foster wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 11:03:40PM -0500, Russ Herrold wrote:
>
> So you would need dhcp to assign dynamic non-routable IPs on your
> network.

no -- you may assign both routables and non-routables -- the
network and gateway parameters determine this, whether
manually assigned at each unit, or distributed by DHCP.

But if you wanted for machine alfa to talk to machine bravo on
> your network, you'd still need BIND, right?

bind permits forward and reverse lookups -- it is not involved
in routing -- lookups may be needed (as with SSH and
inetd/xinetd based access controls.

This seems only reasonable,
> since with dhcp you're not setting up a hosts file, and the [internet]
> nameservers in resolv.conf aren't going to tell you the IPs of machines
> on your network.

you are not prevented from doing so -- these are matters of
convenience by and large.

In other words, in order for local machines to be able
> to resolve IPs/addresses _on your network_, you'd still need something
> running to do that. Which would be BIND, right?

bind, a hosts file, and so forth can all help here -- There is
more than one way to do it -- TIMTOWTDI

> (Please excuse me if I seem to be beating this issue to death. The
> examples I've seen in books don't exactly match the type of small
> network I'm talking about.)

no problem --- this is why one runs a build bench and a test
network.

-- Russ



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 16:10:54 EDT