newbie question

[Kevin Darcy]

Barry Margolin wrote:

> In article <394A5F3F.83BF2069 at daimlerchrysler.com>,
> Kevin Darcy  <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote:
> >This is not a nameserver function, it's a resolver configuration function.
> >It can be done in the resolver configuration using a default domain or a
> >"searchlist", but my personal recommendation is to nip this thing in the
> >bud as early as possible: get your users into the habit of using
> >fully-qualified names. Otherwise, they'll very likely get confused over
> >the "inconsistency" of being able to use short names for some hosts and
> >protocols, but having to use fully-qualified names for others, e.g. for
> >email to other companies. Also, any kind of resolver "searching" or
> >"matching" algorithm tends to generate lots of bogus queries and thus
> >waste valuable DNS infrastructure resources.
>
> I've never been anywhere that didn't configure their machines so you could
> use unqualified names for hosts on the local network.  I don't think anyone
> is confused by it, any more than they're confused about not having to dial
> the local area code on the phone.

In some organizations, it's not always obvious what "local" means for any given
user in any given context.

At a certain level, it becomes more cost-effective for everyone to just use
fully-qualified names (a small productivity hit everyone time a name must be
typed) than for a much larger amount of productivity to be lost because a short
name didn't resolve properly or at all, thus causing Help Desk calls, delayed
production launches, etc.. And, as technology improves and the need to actually
type out hostnames dwindles (because of bookmarks, portals, search engines,
intelligent agents and whatnot), the cost-benefit ratio tilts more and more
towards using fully-qualified names.


- Kevin