home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!rpi!crdgw1!ge-dab!puma.ATL.GE.COM!rsnyder
- From: rsnyder@atl.ge.com (Bob Snyder)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
- Subject: Re: NIS vs DNS
- Message-ID: <1992Sep11.202153.26675@puma.ATL.GE.COM>
- Date: 11 Sep 92 20:21:53 GMT
- References: <1992Sep10.002722.12730@den.mmc.com> <BuCxxt.D97@gabriel.keele.ac.uk>
- Sender: news@puma.ATL.GE.COM (USENET News System)
- Organization: GE Aerospace, Advanced Technology Labs
- Lines: 27
-
- In article <BuCxxt.D97@gabriel.keele.ac.uk> jonathan@gabriel.keele.ac.uk (Jonathan Knight) writes:
-
- >We run NIS and DNS using the Sun approved method. Each NIS master has
- >a resolv.conf which it uses when a host lookup isn't in the NIS maps.
- >
- >Here's why:
- [Good reasons while deleted]
-
- Here's why not:
-
- The support for multi-homed hosts is abysmal. You can't give multiple IP
- addresses to an /etc/hosts file (from what I have been able to see), and if
- you are willing to use only DNS for that, the NIS master will do a DNS query,
- returning the addresses, with the best address first, *from the server's point
- of view*. Let's say I have a NIS server (Machine A) on subnets 1 and 2. I
- also have another multi-homed host (Machine B) that sitts on subnets 1 and 2.
- If a machine on subnet 2 looks up Machine B's address via NIS, it will get
- the address on subnet 1, and will route to that host, even though it could
- reach the machine directly, without routing.
-
- If something I showed here is wrong, please tell me, but this is what
- I am seeing on my networks.
-
- Bob
- --
- Bob Snyder, Computing Services, GE Aerospace, Advanced Technology Labs
- rsnyder@atl.ge.com, (609) 866-6672, FAX: (609) 866-6397, DialComm 8*777-6672
-