> Does this mean that if you are using a DNS, in our case a
> Namesrv as a secondary caching DNS, that you don't require the 'HOSTS'
> set of files?
IMHO, yes (with two caveats).
About the only thing that should be in a local hosts file in these days
should be IPv4 and IPv6 entries for all your local interfaces (the ones
*directly* attached to this stack) and for the loopback address
(127.0.0.1). DNS is absolutely the way to go for everything else.
See:
[RFC-1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and
facilities", STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
[RFC-1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation
and specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
for useful discussion of why host files are deprecated.
Seriously consider a small Linux guest running BIND instead of NAMESRV.
It's more functional, and a lot easier to maintain.
-- db
