Author: rockey_reed AT symantec DOT com (Rockey Reed)
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 05:37:42 -0700
In this area I cannot help but to disagree with Ed, for whom I have great respect. The use of FQDN is used too often to mask a poor DNS configuration. With NBU you need full forward and reverse looku
Author: jpiszcz.backup AT gmail DOT com (Justin Piszcz)
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 08:41:11 -0400
As stated by the previous responder, it is always good practice to use FQDN, why? 1) If your environment expands, for instance if you have more than 6 subdomains in a NetBackup environment, you are s
Author: jlightner AT water DOT com (Jeff Lightner)
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 09:49:03 -0400
Of course for facilities where you don't have and don't expect to have more than 6 domains this isn't an issue. Therefore using /etc/resolv.conf is adequate for most environments though I'll have to
Author: austin.murphy AT gmail DOT com (Austin Murphy)
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 09:58:47 -0400
At my site, I don't control DNS so I don't trust it. Using /etc/hosts works very well. We have several domains and I only use hostname, not FQDN. Network name resolution is not a problem for me. For
Author: GreenbergKA AT aetna DOT com (Greenberg, Katherine A)
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 10:12:12 -0400
Not having to manage /etc/hosts files across multiple servers in a large environmen, comes to mind for me... --Original Message-- From: veritas-bu-admin AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu [mailto:veritas-
Author: Darby.Moses AT ubs DOT com (Darby.Moses AT ubs DOT com)
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 11:06:17 -0400
I would stay away from using hosts & resolve files for anything other than troubleshooting. Try to stick with DNS. --Original Message-- From: veritas-bu-admin AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu [mailto:ve
I actually don't think we're in much disagreement here. I'm not advocating that the DNS not be fixed if it's broken but it's still far clearer to use FQDNs for NetBackup. After all, if I have a serve
Author: jlightner AT water DOT com (Jeff Lightner)
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 11:56:07 -0400
resolv.conf IS used for DNS. The hosts file is used in lieu of or in addition to DNS or other name service. On Unix/Linux precedence of DNS over hosts or vice versa can be set in the /etc/nsswitch.co
Author: David Rock <dave-bu AT graniteweb DOT com> (David Rock)
Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 13:31:16 -0500
* Rockey Reed <rockey_reed AT symantec DOT com> [2006-05-01 05:37]: This sounds like an argument FOR using DNS, not against it. :-) Don't forget, the question was about using FQDN, _not_ using DNS. W
Author: ckstehman AT pepco DOT com (ckstehman AT pepco DOT com)
Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 09:42:41 -0400
This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 004B534685257163_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Disposition: inline Here's my two cents, I recommend using DNS all
Author: simon.weaver AT astrium.eads DOT net (WEAVER, Simon)
Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 15:44:24 +0100
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --_=_NextPart_001_01C66EC0.120065F0 Content-Type: text/plain We
Author: austin.murphy AT gmail DOT com (Austin Murphy)
Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 11:19:51 -0400
The bottom line is NetBackup REQUIRES 100% accurate, reliable, and unambiguous name resolution. Some considerations: - shorter names are generally easier to read and say. - FDQNs are more likely to b
Author: simon.weaver AT astrium.eads DOT net (WEAVER, Simon)
Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 17:20:15 +0100
I use IP and its never failed yet! Even restores are fine! Not saying it's the right way, but in our case, it does indeed work. Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administ