Flaschen, Matthew S wrote:
If he has internal servers that local hosts need access to.
For example. If he is running an Netbios server and the clients need to
access shares on it.
Right.
He does not want the world to know about this NAS,
Obviously.
plus it probably has an RFC1918 address.
I would definitely recommend a local-only address for the local services.
So with a local BIND server, he would set up an Internal view.
He /could/ do that but you haven't said why he should. If he wants his DNS/DHCP server connected to the outside internet, I would recommend he get two ethernet cards, eth0 and eth1, then configure dnsmasq to only serve on only the local interface. Note that this doesn't require any DNS-specific configurations. It is inherently simple and secure.
Perhaps he has an internal WiKi. I can go on with internal servers that
need name resolution.
I think he wants name resolution for all local hosts (why not?).
He can maintain all of this in hosts files on each
client as he seems to have done, or he can run his own internal DNS
server with an internal view.
Nowhere do you say why the complexity of BIND is necessary. He would be served very well (no pun intended) with a far simpler DNS implementation.
So your issue is not DNS, but rather the BIND implementation of DNS.
I have been working with BIND since '93. I have not spent any time
looking at any other implementations of DNS
Go with whatever floats your boat.
Webmin DOES make working with BIND reasonable.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
