Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #185880

Re: Question to new network device names

Show all headers | View raw

On Thursday 24 August 2017 22:15:53 David Wright wrote:

> On Thu 24 Aug 2017 at 20:58:18 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Thursday 24 August 2017 12:30:37 Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:43:56AM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > The history of computing is littered with statements like
> > > > "virtually every computer has exactly one or two NICs".
> > >
> > > It used to be zero.
> > >
> > > We are currently in the phase of history where this statement is
> > > true. NICs are both ubiquitous and cheap, yet devices tend to
> > > come with one (only an ethernet port or only a wifi radio) or
> > > two (one of each of those, or a wifi radio and a cell radio).
> > >
> > > Devices can add more, but they are always special cases: my
> > > Debian-running firewall has 5 ethernet ports. I occasionally
> > > add a USB ethernet frob in order to isolate a device that I want
> > > to talk to directly. Special cases deserve special treatment.
> > >
> > > I expect the statement to remain true for the next ten years.
> > >
> > > Do you expect differently? If so, why?
> > >
> > > > This list is full of postings about the complex DNS system. But
> > > > how long did /etc/hosts last? Some complexity is unavoidable,
> > > > but if you try to avoid it, you pay for it later. Look at
> > > > timezones. Ever allowing computers' internal clocks to run on
> > > > local time was, with hindsight, a big mistake. Leap seconds
> > > > might also be seen the same way (still under debate).
> > >
> > > /etc/hosts still acts the way it always did -- put in an entry,
> > > it overrides DNS.
> >
> > That depends entirely on who wrote your /etc/resolv.conf and whether
> > or not your did a sudo chattr +i /etc/resolv.conf, immediately after
> > verifying that it works. (and of course that implies it is a real
> > file, not a softlink to something else.  With N-M in the mix and
> > active that is the only way to keep it from tearing down your
> > network configuration and leaving you empty files, and no network,
> > if it cannot find a dhcpd server)
>
> (We've heard about your problems concerning /etc/resolv.conf
> several times now.)
>
> I think the file that affects the priority of /etc/hosts is
> /etc/nsswitch.conf which typically contains a line like:
>
> hosts: files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns mdns4
>
But what has that to do with having the proper entry's 
in /etc/resolv.conf?  Whose active lines are:

nameserver 192.168.71.1
search host,dns
domain coyote.den

I am willing to learn IF there is a simpler, even faster and more secure 
way to do it than what I preach.  If those 3 criteria can be satisfied, 
show me how.

That search line "hosts,dns" draws a fine line between my local network, 
which is all in the /etc/hosts file, and the rest of this planet for 
which I need a dns server. dd-wrt in my router relays the resolution 
requests on to my ISP's assigned dns servers, and relays the results 
back to whatever asked for it on my home network regardless of which 
machine or program on that machine originated the request.

AFAIK, no other processing seems to be involved.  According to htop (root 
session) no trace of named or any other dns helper can be found running 
on any of the machines(5) running here ATM.  Pure, boiled it down to the 
simplest way I know how, and it Just Works(TM). FWIW, denyhosts and 
portsentry still work just fine.

Whats not to like?

> But that misses the point I was making, which requires one to know
> a fragment of Internet history. /etc/hosts started life as a file
> containing the address of every host on the network (then ARPANET).
> Simple, sufficient at the time, but obviously not going to stay
> the course.
>
> Similarly, /dev/sdX just about works well enough for simple, static
> systems but not for more complex, dynamic ones; eth0 likewise is
> showing its age for scaling and flexibility, particularly as the
> newer scheme adds functionality without removing the legacy.
>
> Cheers,
> David.


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Question to new network device names Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2017-08-24 13:20 +0200
  Re: Question to new network device names Dejan Jocic <jodejka@gmail.com> - 2017-08-24 13:40 +0200
  Re: Question to new network device names Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2017-08-24 13:50 +0200
  Re: Question to new network device names <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-08-24 14:00 +0200
    Re: Question to new network device names The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-08-24 15:20 +0200
      Re: Question to new network device names <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-08-24 15:30 +0200
      Re: Question to new network device names Dave Sherohman <dave@sherohman.org> - 2017-08-24 15:40 +0200
        Re: Question to new network device names The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-08-24 16:00 +0200
        Re: Question to new network device names Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-08-24 16:30 +0200
          Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-24 17:50 +0200
            Re: Question to new network device names The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-08-24 18:10 +0200
              Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-24 18:50 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-08-24 19:10 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-24 20:20 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-08-25 05:10 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-25 07:30 +0200
            Re: Question to new network device names Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-08-24 18:40 +0200
              Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-24 21:30 +0200
              Re: Question to new network device names Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-08-25 03:00 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-25 04:30 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-08-25 07:00 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-25 07:30 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-08-25 08:30 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-08-25 15:30 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-25 17:10 +0200
        Re: Question to new network device names Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2017-08-24 17:50 +0200
          Re: Question to new network device names The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-08-24 18:00 +0200
            Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-24 19:00 +0200
              Re: Question to new network device names Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-08-24 19:40 +0200
                Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-24 20:00 +0200
      Re: Question to new network device names David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-24 18:20 +0200
  Re: Question to new network device names Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2017-08-25 14:00 +0200

csiph-web