installing bind

[David Botham]

bind-users-bounce at isc.org wrote on 10/10/2004 03:37:15 AM:
> "Simon Dodd"
> 
> > Jacob, 
> > If you're going to also be administering the box as well as installing
> > it, the best advice you're going to get is to invest in a copy of "DNS
> > & BIND" by Albitz & Lie (O'Reilly , ISBN 0-596-00158-4). This book is
> > widely regarded as the Bible for DNS in general and BIND in
> > particular, and it covers everything you're likely to want or need to
> > know about getting BIND, installing it, configuring it and maintaining
> > it when it's running. 
> > 
> 

[clipped rant that does not help anyone]

> 
> So I look in there and find RESOLV.CONF.... hmmmm hold on a second
> there is a RESOLV.CONF in the install directory too...
> Which one is used, why and where does it say so???

You put resolv.conf in the location where your OS is going to use it. 
However, NT does not use resolv.conf.  I am not sure if the NT port of 
BIND requires it though. 

> 
> Am I alone about being confused here or is the information simply 
> intentionally confusing to prevent learning?
> 
> Could someone PLEASE make a list of the files installed and where they 
> really go, and preferably make a simple example with two or three 
domains 
> in it? That would really truly help emensly and reduce the need for us 
> newbies having to sit and scratch our heads asking the same questions a 
> gazillion times.

I am not sure statements like this one, and others I have clipped from 
this message, are going to do much to advance your position in this forum 
or help you solve your problems. 

Do not blame the people here for the complexities in the domain name 
system and the software implementations that make it work. 

People on this list are volunteers and provide help as a gimmy, you might 
find more help if you treat those about to help you with a little respect. 
 We all faught the same battles you are facing and have broke the code 
over the years.  Settle down and take your time... knowledge will 
follow....



Dave...


> 
>     Thanks for reading this.
>     Techie
>