On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 15:19, Jake McHenry wrote: > > > > > My second question still stands though, is there a way for > > > > me to have > > > > > dns work for all the client machines without using the > > > > hosts file on > > > > > the windows boxes? > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > What about DHCP? > > > > > > I'm not using dhcp because of remote administration. I have ports > > > being forwarded in the router to the private ipaddresses, > > so to know > > > what machine I'm connecting to, I cannot implement dhcp. > > > > I don't quite understand this reason :) If the clients used > > an internal dhcp server to allocate static ip addresses and > > dns address, then your router could still forward remote > > connections to the right machine. [snip] > > Anything will fulfill my requirements as long as it works. But I'm not > sure that the dns server and setup of ip addresses is the problem. I > would like to know if there is a way around using the hosts files on > the workstations. The only reason I set up the private dns zones was > to try to acomplish this. *enligtened aah*. You can forget the DHCP unless you want that warm fuzzy feeling in your stomach that you've administered a complete network! > Without the hosts file, when the workstations access nittanytravel.com > (local server), the local server responds with the public IP (which is > the ip on the outside interface of the router). Then all the > workstations in our main office end up in the logs (email and web) as > ntlh.nittanytravel.com. *second enlightened aah* > This was not a problem for me, everything works, but my boss wants to > view what each machine does. Hence my problem. So you want local connections to the server coming through the lan rather than going outside and back in again. > Right now everything is working, but I spent 4 hours today > transferring the new hosts file to all the workstations. (I wasn't > thinking at the time to add it to their login script). > > I'm not sure where I'm going with this, but I would like a solution > where I don't have to use the hosts file, and all of the workstations > show up in the logs with their private ip, not the public. Well, if the hosts file option is working, you may as well leave it since its only going to take more time to do something else. OTOH, its alway fun doing things the "right" way :) > Does your solution provide this? From what I understand, it's > basically the same as I have now, except for the dhcp server. Well, you need an internal dns server that resolves nittanytravel.com to the internal IP address of that machine before it tries to resolve it to the external interface of said machine. Hmm, AFAIK a dns server will do this. I had one dns server serving local and remote addresses, but not a local address to a name that also had a remote address. I don't see why it wouldn't work, in fact I know of its use so it must be possible. I think if you set up your dns server as a resolving caching nameserver, and give it the local address of nittanytravel.com, your local clients should get that local address in precedence to the external interface of nittanytravel.com, so long as they point only to your local dns (hence the DHCP). (If they only point to an external dns, then they'll get the external interface to nittanytravel.com, and if they point to both, they'll get the response from whichever dns is listed first, and up and running). See http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/DNS-HOWTO.html for more info on this. Especially section 10 question 6 (forward only) if your link ever goes down. HTH (and makes sense!) -- Iain Buchanan <iain@xxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Shrike-list mailing list Shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/shrike-list
