On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 12:07:10PM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> If all you are doing is adding a additional name, like "amanda_server"
> to an existing hostname/ip_address pairing I can see name confusion
> easily arising.
> 
> But would that be true if you ran a second NIC in the server?  It should
> respond with the hostname associated with that IP.

The most important thing, as far as Amanda is concerned, is that
forward and reverse lookups are sensibly matched.  So your hostname
should lookup to an address that contains a valid hostname for the
client/server.

All of our servers provide backups for two physically disparate
networks.  We manage this currently by creating entries in hosts files
for servers that need backups (uggg...), though I want to move it all
to DNS.

If you ever get confused about what entries should exist, the easiest
way to figure it out is to run amcheck and see what it complains
about!  Usually you'll get something descriptive like "10.0.0.2: No
such host", and then you'll know you need to configure a name.

> No second NIC, then what about additional IP addresses on the same NIC?
> Those should be associated with their own hostnames also.  Solaris, linux,
> and other unicies I'm familiar with all support multiple IP addresses on
> a single NIC.

If you're concerned about portability, this is probably the easiest
way.  Bind a second IP to your server, setup name lookups for that
second IP, and then float it around to whatever box you need to be
migrating to at the time.

-- 
Ross Vandegrift
ross AT kallisti DOT us

"The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who
make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians
have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine
man in the bonds of Hell."
        --St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book II, xviii, 37