Networker

Re: [Networker] ALL Clients suddenly started failing

2008-10-06 11:20:15
Subject: Re: [Networker] ALL Clients suddenly started failing
From: "Coty, Edward" <Edward.Coty AT AIG DOT COM>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 11:15:47 -0400
How about using local hosts files and then DNS. This way if you miss something 
with updating your local host files then hopefully DNS will pick it up. We use 
DNS primarily here but in a DR situation we have relied on local host files and 
not DNS. You can maintain both so you have some redundancy in your name 
resolution.


EDWARD COTY

LEAD STORAGE ENGINEER, LCNA, NACP

WORK - 973-533-2098

CELL - 973-296-0918

EDWARD.COTY AT AIG DOT COM


-----Original Message-----
From: EMC NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU] On 
Behalf Of Davina Treiber
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 10:40 AM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [Networker] ALL Clients suddenly started failing

Goslin, Paul wrote:
> While I agree that maintaining a client host file is a PITA.... It's not that 
> much effort in my experience... And worth it in the long run. Unless you have 
> a very dynamic network with backup clients constantly being added / 
> removed....

If you believe that then you are perfectly at liberty to convert your 
environment to use hosts files. However from my experience it will be a 
nightmare. As an example consider the case when you decide to add a new storage 
node and you have to add that address to the hosts file on 600 clients. I would 
not want to be the one tasked with that. OK perhaps your environment is not 
that large, but that just illustrates the fact that hosts files do not scale 
and DNS does.

>
> I feel it's more practical than naïve... I now have a weekend of failed 
> backups due to failed DNS lookups... I have no control over the DNS server... 
>  As long as the client is up and responding on the proper ports, Networker 
> should simply back it up.... What does it matter if the reverse lookup fails, 
> and how is that more significant than backing up your companies' data ???
>

The point of the reverse lookup is to verify to each machine that the other 
machines are what they say they are. Not everyone agrees that this is the best 
security method, but you have other options for this now anyway.

What else in your network stopped working when DNS went down? In most 
organisations this would generate a call-out and someone would be fixing it 
toute-suite.

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or via RSS at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER