home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: vmsnet.networks.tcp-ip.multinet
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!csc.ti.com!tilde.csc.ti.com!mksol!usenet
- From: pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com (Dillon Pyron)
- Subject: Re: What is the format of the WHOIS database?
- Message-ID: <1992Aug28.130329.28430@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
- Lines: 26
- Sender: usenet@mksol.dseg.ti.com (Usenet News)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: skndiv.dseg.ti.com
- Reply-To: pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com
- Organization: TI/DSEG VAX Support
- References: <2020402127AUG92204552@TGV.COM>
- Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 13:03:29 GMT
-
-
- In article <2020402127AUG92204552@TGV.COM>, ACCESS@KRDC.INT.ALCAN.CA (Shawn Allin - Alcan KRDC Computer Services) writes:
- >
- >We have an internal TCP/IP network here that is growing by the day. Users
- >are now wanting a name lookup service to aid in connectivity. I was
- >thinking of using WHOIS internally. I took a look at RFC954, but can't
- >find any reference to how to set up a private database. Is it doable/
- >practical?
- >
- I'm working on one for our internal net. The format of the database really
- doesn't matter, what matters is the format of the reply to the requestor, which
- is fairly well defined in RFC812. You can either specify /HOST= to point to
- your server or modify the CLD to do the same by default. the latter is easier
- on the user, but harder on the system manager, as each upgrade of MultiNet may
- require reinstalling this modification. Of course, my other platforms are not
- nearly as gracious, and offer more opportunities. ("We don't have problems,
- just opportunities")
- --
- Dillon Pyron | The opinions expressed are those of the
- TI/DSEG Lewisville VAX Support | sender unless otherwise stated.
- (214)462-3556 (when I'm here) |
- (214)492-4656 (when I'm home) |"Do something different, DISAPPEAR"
- pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com | "DISAPPEAR"
- _A Day On Earth_
- Brave Combo
-
-