>On Sunday, December 30, 2001, at 06:19 PM, Don Yuniskis wrote:
>
>> Do you even *need* a name server?  If you have 1 or 2
>> hosts, use /etc/hosts as a static database and configure
>> the resolver to use that.  If you want to connect to outside
>> hosts, point the resolver at your ISP's DNS.
>
>The problem is that I have a desk with 4 computers on it. They all 
>have different IP addresses (obviously) and I communicate between 
>the m *alot* (most of the day) to share files, use SSH and FTP and 

Fine.  hosts(5) should work just fine.  Set up your resolver to
use hosts(5) first, then the name server from your ISP (don't
really have much need to resolve "foreign" names if you aren't
connected to your ISP!).

>share the internet. I am getting monumentally hacked off with 
>typing in IP addresses and I keep forgetting which one belongs to 
>which machine. Names, on the other hand, would make them a lot 
>easier to talk to. I already mirror my ISP's DNS servers across the 
>network using an OS X program via my iBook (the only one with a 56k 
>Modem that works) so that isn't the problem. I'd love to do it just 
>using the 'hosts' file but this is not an ideal world. I cant find 
>a way to predefine hosts in Windows XP, 

Sorry, I don't do windows...

>I also know that OS X 
>doesn't use 'hosts' unless int's in single user mode. Add to that 

Are you *sure* about that?  It probably *resorts* to hosts(5)
in single user mode as most/all network services are brought
down.  But, I suspect it can be *configured* to use hosts
when running multiuser...  not sure what the resolver is named
under Mac OS X... perhaps "apropos DNS" or "apropos resolver"
may be a starting point.

>the fact I don't really want to leave an OS X box on over night 
>(I'd rather the hard disk in my LC burned out than the one in my 
>G3!) and you see where I'm coming from?
>
>If I could setup a file on my LCIII that just told everything that 

Run MacDNS under MacOS.  I suspect simpler than running named
under NetBSD (I imagine an LCIII would be pretty pokey...?)

>asked the hostname. I would but I thought NAMED did that. I 
>dispare, you guys can be so discouraging at times....

No, we try to produce solutions that fit your needs AS PERCEIVED.
Most folks "at home" are dealing with a handful of hosts.
It's just plain silly to set up DNS when a simple text file
(hosts(5)) gives you all that functionality.  Especially on
legacy iron.

Sort of like dicking with DHCP for just two hosts... :-/

Would you rather the answers provided err on the side of
being overly complicated as well as labor and CPU intensive?

>I know your only trying to stop me getting into a mess but I like 
>playing around and getting something to work. Give me a line here!
>
>> Don't set up DNS if you don't know what you are doing since
>> mistakes there will just *increase* traffic on the 'net
>> with no positive results for you...
>
>I'm really not being insulting here but you guys can be a bit short 
>sighted to be honest, nearly everything you recommend is a specific 
>solution to Unix systems. I know it may be because that is what you 
>know best an I admire that (it's better than being Windows only ppl 
>after all!) but I am trying to do a cross platform solution here 
>and most of the stuff you suggest just won't work on other OSs. The 

Other OS's often have different names for the same thing.
Note that even WfWG had a "LMHOSTS" file (?  I hope I haven't
misremembered that).  Note that MacOS had a named (MacDNS).
Solaris, NetBSD, etc.  Part of being multiplatform literate
is knowing the alter-egos of each of these tools...

>whole reason I want to set up a DNS is that I want it to be able to 
>tell ANY computer a name for itself or other computers.
>Everytime I ask you just put up a wall and say 'don't go 
>there'.Well my friend managed it in Linux so I can do it too. So 
>tell me - is there any info on it around or am I just going to go 
>on asking until I go blue?

Get a copy of BOG.  Buy the OReilly book.  Read the man pages.
What else do you want?  A yellow book titled "BIND for Dummies"?
:>

DNS is not a trivial thing to get running correctly.  Sure, you
can get it producing "correct" answers but often doing that
in an incorrect/inopportune manner.  If you are just wasting your
own CPU cycles, <shrug>.  But, if your DNS is misconfigured and
passing crap out to the rest of the world, then you're not
being "right neighborly"...

I ran things here with hosts(5) for a long time just to *avoid*
dealing with DNS.  But, now have too many hosts to manually
maintain that database.

>If it's any motivation the very existence of my LCIII depends on 
>this....

I just tossed out a few LC II's because I couldn't find anything
*small* enough for them to do... :-/  Even serving X proved to
be too costly!  And I don't think they keep good enough time
to act as NTP servers...  (though I think the LC III -- or maybe 
the III+? -- has a 32 bit data path which would help...)

--don