Networker

Re: [Networker] Networker and hostnames (was Re: [Networker] Client a lways saves as level Full?)

2002-10-16 17:42:50
Subject: Re: [Networker] Networker and hostnames (was Re: [Networker] Client a lways saves as level Full?)
From: "Shelley L. Shostak" <sls AT QSTECH DOT COM>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 14:42:45 -0700
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Dave Mussulman wrote:

>
> That's one of the things that I'm really beginning to dislike about
> Networker -- its heavy use of host based authentication.  With the
> heavier use of dynamic IP pools in our environment (wireless, VPNs, as
> well as other complicated scenarios like machines with multiple
> interfaces/in multiple subnets, etc.,) tying a single hostname back to a
> computer is difficult!  Dynamic DNS sounds like it would be the solution
> -- except it's not.  Even when I setup a client with its dynamic DNS as
> the main client name, I still need to put its actual hostnames in the
> aliases field.  (Which works if the hostnames it uses are semi-static --
> in a truly dynamic environment, it'd be impossible to account for that.)
>
> (And while I'm ranting about Legato's hostname dependencies, I don't see
> why the Windows client needs to know the NETBIOS name as well as all the
> possible DNS names.  Grrrrr.)
>

Dave,

This is a network*ing* issue, not a network*er* issue.  If you do not
understand how your host does hostname resolution it is not Networker's fault.
I like the fact that I can tell Networker which interface to use and have
private connections between hosts without having to rely on static routing
tables on hosts.

I do not understand how dynamic DNS fails you.  What do you mean by "actual
hostname"?  We use it for all of our Windows boxes and it works great (except
that MS dynamic DNS has some basic design flaws).  A hostname is a hostname is
a hostname.  Networker has always recommended you put in FQDN and bare
hostname in the Aliases field for all clients.

> It makes me envious of the TSM environments, where clients are
> configured with a client name and a password and that's it -- the
> computer's hostname is not as big of a deal.  Can someone confirm this
> type of functionality is slated for a future version of Networker?
>

I have never used TSM, but people I know who have used it are not enamored
with it.

Shelley

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>