On Sunday 17 August 2003 08:38 am, Buchan Milne wrote: > BTW, does anyone know if tmdns is of any use? If all it's going to do is > make `hostname` resolve on the local machine, we might as well use > /etc/hosts for this. If the user has DHCP, chances are they have DNS, and > tmdns is useless. Apparently the use of .local has some issues on > Windows2000 domains when using default settings. > If you recall, there was major discussions about the network changes during the runup to 9.1. IMO then, and still now, tmdns does nothing but add uneeded complexity, and if you uninstall it and run drakconnect, it reinstalls. > > The only reason tmdns can be useful is in a network of machines *not* > connected to the internet, which *don't* use DHCP, and which *don't* have > DNS. Thus, IMHO, tmdns should only be started if DHCP leases are not > available (when using a zcip address), and *only* if tmdns can resolve > names of other zeroconf machines.
I believe this is true of zeroconf too. I have not run into one setup yet where zeroconf or tmdns have come into play. The only scenario I can think of is a home network, where no one is connected to the Internet persistently (eg dialup). Most people on broadband use some form of router, or only have one machine connected. Most business networks have either a static policy or a dhcp server and/or a proxy setup (mnf). > Please note I haven't installed cooker recently, I will probably install > beta2 today ... > > I am sure I filed a bug on this in 9.1 beta series, so please search in > bugzilla .... -- /g "Outside of a dog, a man's best friend is a book, inside a dog it's too dark to read" -Groucho Marx
