According to firstname.lastname@example.org (Phill Hoff):
>Many thanks to those who replied to my orginal post of:
>>I was talking to a vendor and they suggested that in order to have high
>>availabliity we should have all of our 140 clients be NIS slaves and bind
>>to themselves. This would get us around a problem of having an NIS slave go down
>>then hanging its clients till they rebound to someone else. It certainly makes
>>me think! Has anyone tried this? If so how would you make a NIS slave
>>bind only to itself and not let anyone else bind to it. At the same time would
>>having all machines be NIS slaves create alot of overhead when the maps are
>It seems that it would be too much overhead on the pushes.
>Here were the replies:
>We've 9 UNIX-workstations at our institute. Each of them is in its
>own domain (regarding NIS). They all are their own server. Every night
>the catch the new password file from ONE machine, make some changes in this
>password (not all users are allowed on all machines) and use it as
>their new password file.
>Since we made this configuration we have much less trouble with the
>availability of our workstations. There's only one 'problem': In order
>to change your password, you have to log on the main server and the
>change will propageted the next morning.
>If you wish, I can send you the shell-scripts we are using for this.
> Thomas Stuempfig
Do you have the book 'Managing NIS and NFS' by Hal Stern of Sun?
(ISBN 0-937175-75-7 O'Reilly and Assoc.)
I understand that a single server is able to serve about 20-50
NIS clients, so about 5 servers would be enough. You could easily
increase that number to 10 or 15, maybe more, and still have a
high level of availability, without all the problems you have when
making every client a server as well.
This looks silly, IMHO. Why not use netgroups (that's what they
are for!) have one domain and only push the maps to the slaves
when needed (together with ypxfr_?per???). In your setup you
would need to allow all users to log in to the main server.
I do not see why 9 separate domains for 9 machines gives you
higher availability than one domain with 2 to 9 NIS servers for
9 machines... Or _am_ I missing something?
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mechatronics Research Centre Twente -- Mobile Autonomous Robot Twente email@example.com -- firstname.lastname@example.org -- +31 53 893296 Twente University WB/WA P.O. box 217 NL-7500 AE ENSCHEDE THE NETHERLANDS
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:08:01 CDT