dhcp ddns nubie

[Sten Carlsen]

Just one piece of advice that cost me a weekend.
DON'T use .local, use anything else. Apple is using .local for their
rendevouz system. I had my rfc1918 addresses organised in .local, the
result was that my new MAC was almost not working and was certainly not
visible from anywhere. After a long digging I discovered that .local had
this special meaning and changed everything to .home and everything
started working as expected.

At the moment I use views to have the same names inside my lan as I have
on the outside, with the only difference that addresses seen from inside
are rfc1918 and on the outside are assigned by my ISP. All my hostnames
end in .dk, I have never seem any bad effect of using .dk TLD both
inside and outside.

In terms of OSs you could use the same box to run bind and dhcp with
windows or solaris10. I will not  recommend any of them, personally I
use Linux (Redhat/Fedora) for this (uptime so far: 484 days).

/dev/rob0 wrote:

>>godfather55v wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>We have been running a novell dns dhcp forever.  I want to get away
>>>from that and would like to possibly go ddns, if not full ddns at
>>>least get a way from a canned novell, or microsoft solution.  So
>>>where do i start?
>>>      
>>>
>
>Reading manuals, learning protocols, that's where I started. Set up a 
>BIND server, set up a dhcpd, follow the instructions. DDNS is not 
>difficult. Most things Unix are like that: if you understand what is 
>being done, the implementation is easy.
>
>Your BIND server should have an in-addr.arpa. zone for the network 
>you're using. If it's RFC 1918 space, no problem, be authoritative for 
>as much of that as you wish. That zone and your forward zone(s) you 
>plan to use need to have "allow-update" directives. If the DNS master 
>is also the DHCP server this is trivial.
>
>Some things to consider:
>   You cannot edit a dynamic zone file. Plan to let named manage it. 
>Become familiar with nsupdate(8).
>   If you're going to use a real Internet domain name and RFC 1918 
>addresses, you should use BIND views to prevent publishing your 
>internal DNS on the Internet. I recommend making up your own TLD, such 
>as .local or .lan, for RFC 1918 DDNS.
>
>  
>
>>>Is linux the only way to go?  Is there ports of 
>>>dns,dhcp,and bind for windows, or netware.
>>>      
>>>
>
>And you checked the isc.org site, and you saw ... ?
>
>  
>
>>>I'm not overly fluent in linux, or is it simple enough to the
>>>point that i don't have to be?
>>>      
>>>
>
>I doubt that these require great Unix sysadmin skills, but it surely 
>helps. I first set up DDNS when I was already pretty strong in basics 
>of shell and system management, so I cannot say from experience.
>
>On Friday 2005-November-18 03:09, per engelbrecht wrote:
>  
>
>>No Linux is not the only way!
>>    
>>
>
>This is absolutely true.
>
>  
>
>>If you're going the OSS (Open Source Software) way for a DDNS/DHCP
>>solution and you're not "overly" fluent on Linux, then you'll have
>>some basic skills to learn anyway and then I would recommend BSD. No,
>>    
>>
>
>I don't know about this. Linux tends to be "easier" in some ways, or 
>that is what I have heard. Linux meets my needs so I have never 
>bothered to branch out into *BSD land.
>
>  
>
>>I don't want to start a ridiculous flame-war but I've run public
>>nameservers the last 6 years on both Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD
>>(currently both FreeBSD and OpenBSD ) and the BSD's have proven
>>themself time and again as ultra fast and rock-steady and yes, you
>>have all the tools you need for any situation. You have the same
>>tools with Linux, but I've always had small problems with Linux. Not
>>big ones, just annoying small ones. Linux is work, work and work.
>>    
>>
>
>This is completely subjective. Sounds to me like this poster began in 
>Linux and had problems due to lack of experience. Then he gained the 
>requisite experience in *BSD, lo and behold, things work. A competent 
>Linux admin will have no trouble with DHCP and BIND.
>
>The one thing I will say is that the *BSD user communities tend to be 
>more clueful. In GNU/Linux you have millions and millions of clueless 
>Windows refugees, and in user forums you often see the blind leading 
>the blind. I have heard that *BSD is not as much like that.
>
>Some GNU/Linux distros are less conducive to learning. They try to do 
>more for the user and thus shield the user from what is being done. 
>Perhaps this poster's Linux experience was in something like SuSE, 
>RH/Fedora/CentOS or Mandr(ake|iva).
>
>  
>
>>On top of that the BSD's (not sure about NetBSD, but they're bright
>>guys so I expect it to be the same) has BIND "preconfigured". Most
>>often you only need to add zones and then start the daemon and
>>    
>>
>
>Preconfigured for DDNS? The distributor would have to know what zones 
>you would be serving. The best they could do is to include sample 
>named.conf and dhcpd.conf files.
>  
>

-- 
Best regards

Sten Carlsen

Let HIM who has an empty INBOX send the first mail.