DNS discussion
-
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
Don't have all static. What's the value in that? I think for the new stuff I'm setting up, only the hypervisors, DHCP, and DNS servers are static. Everything else is reservations and dynamic.
-
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
-
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
-
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
This post makes me wonder - Does Windows auto convert IP log entries into host names in Windows logs? I know it doesn't need to, it can collect this information when the connection is made, but it might, because saving that information is just extra info that could be found through a translation later.
No, it cannot be found through a translation later. because that information may no longer correctly match. You HAVE to get the translation immediately or your logs are worthless (regarding the reverse DNS informaiton).
Event happens Saturday and only IP is logged.
DNS updates on Monday because device on IP changed.
You pull Saturday's log on Wednesday and get Monday's machine name.
Have fun tracking down the real problem.
-
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
This post makes me wonder - Does Windows auto convert IP log entries into host names in Windows logs? I know it doesn't need to, it can collect this information when the connection is made, but it might, because saving that information is just extra info that could be found through a translation later.
No, it cannot be found through a translation later. because that information may no longer correctly match. You HAVE to get the translation immediately or your logs are worthless (regarding the reverse DNS informaiton).
Event happens Saturday and only IP is logged.
DNS updates on Monday because device on IP changed.
You pull Saturday's log on Wednesday and get Monday's machine name.
Have fun tracking down the real problem.
Good point JB - though you don't need reverse DNS for that, you can get the host name from the client itself, which would be much more accurate.
-
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
This post makes me wonder - Does Windows auto convert IP log entries into host names in Windows logs? I know it doesn't need to, it can collect this information when the connection is made, but it might, because saving that information is just extra info that could be found through a translation later.
No, it cannot be found through a translation later. because that information may no longer correctly match. You HAVE to get the translation immediately or your logs are worthless (regarding the reverse DNS informaiton).
Event happens Saturday and only IP is logged.
DNS updates on Monday because device on IP changed.
You pull Saturday's log on Wednesday and get Monday's machine name.
Have fun tracking down the real problem.
Good point JB - though you don't need reverse DNS for that, you can get the host name from the client itself, which would be much more accurate.
Which client? All you have in the log is the IP in this scheme. If you track that IP now, it will be a different machine.
-
@wirestyle22 said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
Exactly this
Why would it be manual? What situation is causing there to be any amount of work?
-
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
Right.... layers of mistakes where one mistake is leading to another based on it. If PTR records take any effort, don't ignore the real problem by not updating PTR, instead, fix the actual problem.
-
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@wirestyle22 said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
Exactly this
Why would it be manual? What situation is causing there to be any amount of work?
I love my playbook for this. I have reservations but they don't auto update DNS. The dict has the host info (address, record type, mac, etc) and generates the reservation and adds the A and PTR at the same time. Any changes are done in Git and it's all automatic.
-
In all our schools we have a Solus3 deployment server that uses reverse lookups when you're doing initial client setups in it. Solus3 updates SIMS and FMS which are the MIS and finance systems that run the school.
-
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
Right.... layers of mistakes where one mistake is leading to another based on it. If PTR records take any effort, don't ignore the real problem by not updating PTR, instead, fix the actual problem.
Of course - but Wire doesn't control their decision or timing to move to DHCP.
-
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
Right.... layers of mistakes where one mistake is leading to another based on it. If PTR records take any effort, don't ignore the real problem by not updating PTR, instead, fix the actual problem.
Of course - but Wire doesn't control their decision or timing to move to DHCP.
Doesn't change the fact that it is a mistake in the design and planning. The question was not put as "should we work around someone intentionally blocking a fix."
-
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
Right.... layers of mistakes where one mistake is leading to another based on it. If PTR records take any effort, don't ignore the real problem by not updating PTR, instead, fix the actual problem.
Of course - but Wire doesn't control their decision or timing to move to DHCP.
Doesn't change the fact that it is a mistake in the design and planning. The question was not put as "should we work around someone intentionally blocking a fix."
How do you operate in a completely static environment is more what I'm wondering. First time I've ever seen this tbh.
-
@wirestyle22 said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
Right.... layers of mistakes where one mistake is leading to another based on it. If PTR records take any effort, don't ignore the real problem by not updating PTR, instead, fix the actual problem.
Of course - but Wire doesn't control their decision or timing to move to DHCP.
Doesn't change the fact that it is a mistake in the design and planning. The question was not put as "should we work around someone intentionally blocking a fix."
How do you operate in a completely static environment is more what I'm wondering. First time I've ever seen this tbh.
Don't...
-
@wirestyle22 said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
Right.... layers of mistakes where one mistake is leading to another based on it. If PTR records take any effort, don't ignore the real problem by not updating PTR, instead, fix the actual problem.
Of course - but Wire doesn't control their decision or timing to move to DHCP.
Doesn't change the fact that it is a mistake in the design and planning. The question was not put as "should we work around someone intentionally blocking a fix."
How do you operate in a completely static environment is more what I'm wondering. First time I've ever seen this tbh.
It's "easy". And I mean that literally. Like it isn't complex at all. It takes a lot of manual effort, but just busy work, nothing hard.
-
@coliver said in DNS discussion:
@wirestyle22 said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
Right.... layers of mistakes where one mistake is leading to another based on it. If PTR records take any effort, don't ignore the real problem by not updating PTR, instead, fix the actual problem.
Of course - but Wire doesn't control their decision or timing to move to DHCP.
Doesn't change the fact that it is a mistake in the design and planning. The question was not put as "should we work around someone intentionally blocking a fix."
How do you operate in a completely static environment is more what I'm wondering. First time I've ever seen this tbh.
Don't...
It's not my choice. We inherited this nightmare. We will eventually switch to DHCP but I don't dictate when that happens
-
@wirestyle22 said in DNS discussion:
@coliver said in DNS discussion:
@wirestyle22 said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
Right.... layers of mistakes where one mistake is leading to another based on it. If PTR records take any effort, don't ignore the real problem by not updating PTR, instead, fix the actual problem.
Of course - but Wire doesn't control their decision or timing to move to DHCP.
Doesn't change the fact that it is a mistake in the design and planning. The question was not put as "should we work around someone intentionally blocking a fix."
How do you operate in a completely static environment is more what I'm wondering. First time I've ever seen this tbh.
Don't...
It's not my choice. We inherited this nightmare. We will eventually switch to DHCP but I don't dictate when that happens
Well you could
You just say "line in the sand, stop making me waste time to play around when there is a fix and you aren't letting me fix it." You always have that choice, of course you might have to walk, but would they really axe you because you pushed them to save money, fix things earlier and reduce workload that was just busy work? -
Who DOES determine that you will not fix things properly today? Who is making that decision right now and what was their reasoning?
-
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@wirestyle22 said in DNS discussion:
@coliver said in DNS discussion:
@wirestyle22 said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
@JaredBusch said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
@Dashrender said in DNS discussion:
@stacksofplates said in DNS discussion:
For me it's mostly convenience. Another use other than what I mentioned before is I can quickly find what machine a person SSH'd in from.
But I know FreeIPA replicas need it because I just installed one this morning and had to add the PTR.
OK these are useful tools for IT, but they aren't requirements. The system won't suddenly stop replicating, or authenticating, etc because you don't have reverse DNS setup.
It's kinda obvious that Wire has a mess in his static environment. I'm thinking that he should just kill the reverse entries to prevent the problem he experienced in trouble shooting this.
He also needs to kill WINS, but that's another matter.
It literally won't install the replicate without it so it is a requirement.
So let's reverse the question. If nothing relies on it, how can the reverse be screwing anything up?
Well, in this case - it led someone to a wrong conclusion to the root of a problem. Now this isn't the fault of reverse DNS.
But having to maintain a manual reverse DNS table can be a fair amount of work, and if it offers no value, why do it?
And I think you answered your own question here. It may have led them to the wrong conclusion based on bad information, but one that is properly set up is useful or else they wouldn't even have been looking there.
Right, if you are going to have a static network, then this is simply one more thing that you have to deal with as I said earlier. Not doing it is going to cause problems sooner or later.
Right.... layers of mistakes where one mistake is leading to another based on it. If PTR records take any effort, don't ignore the real problem by not updating PTR, instead, fix the actual problem.
Of course - but Wire doesn't control their decision or timing to move to DHCP.
Doesn't change the fact that it is a mistake in the design and planning. The question was not put as "should we work around someone intentionally blocking a fix."
How do you operate in a completely static environment is more what I'm wondering. First time I've ever seen this tbh.
Don't...
It's not my choice. We inherited this nightmare. We will eventually switch to DHCP but I don't dictate when that happens
Well you could
You just say "line in the sand, stop making me waste time to play around when there is a fix and you aren't letting me fix it." You always have that choice, of course you might have to walk, but would they really axe you because you pushed them to save money, fix things earlier and reduce workload that was just busy work?That doesn't benefit me. I can offer advice and explaining the reasoning behind a decision but at the end of the day it's their choice. If they decide to not follow my advice then I just accept it and move on. Once I get to where I need to be RHCE wise I'll hopefully just leave for a better job anyway.
-
@scottalanmiller said in DNS discussion:
Who DOES determine that you will not fix things properly today? Who is making that decision right now and what was their reasoning?
I've realized that if I wanted everything to be done the way I think they should be done I need to create my own MSP, which I'm not ready to do yet.
