And firstname.lastname@example.org (Barry Margolin) tells us:
> You don't have to rely on "one NIS server". You can have as many
> NIS servers as you want; if one fails, its clients will switch to
> another one.
> It's not done by the NIS master server, it's done by whichever NIS
> server the client asks. And it may result in fewer DNS queries,
> since all the clients of that server will share its cache. If
> resolving were done on the clients, each client would have to query
> for the same host.
Both valid points/corrections. I suppose that's the "the rest
of the world is like us" logic error (we have only one NIS server.)
The bottom line, though, is that Sun makes it difficult to get
proper DNS resolving without running NIS. Not only that, but they
don't *document* that fact anywhere; you have to figure out on your
own (translation: ask here, or elsewhere) why DNS resolving doesn't
work without NIS (as shipped.)
Bugs in the OS are to be expected. Poor support and
documentation of anything but the "expected" way of doing things is
not. Granted, I'm not about to give away our 670MP over this, but
it's still irritating.
-- James Ralston Crawford \ Advanced Graphics Lab email@example.com \ firstname.lastname@example.org "I just hate it when people don't think that I'm, well, sane." -Od "If someone thought I was sane, I'd worry about THEM." -Sh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:06:44 CDT