Re: Question to new network device names

From	David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.user
Subject	Re: Question to new network device names
Date	2017-08-25 07:30 +0200
Message-ID	<uiflT-8m5-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<uhYl3-5Ic-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <uib8C-5ry-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <uicxI-6zl-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <uieSS-7VN-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri 25 Aug 2017 at 00:54:11 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote:
> 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

I can't parse ↑ this line. Are you sure your resolver can?
Why does it contain a comma? Are "host" and "dns" domain names?

> 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?

Cheers,
David.

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