Again, most discussions seem to have missed my point that this is not a
technical issue, but something of a much broader significance.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I may have missed something in context here but I do not believe this is
some conspiracy.
Setting a hostname is something normal in DHCP operation. It is a
configuration option on a DHCP server and overrideable option on a DHCP
client.
This option is useful if you need it but can be equally a pain if you
don't. That is why it can be overriden on the client end.
Here is a typicial config entry in a DHCP server and one I use on my
local network:
host printsrv {
option host-name "printsrv.sux2beu.ml.org";
hardware ethernet 00:A0:C9:95:53:DD;
fixed-address 192.168.0.20;
}
In fact I use this configuration for a majority of workstations on my
local network (not the servers) as I think its easier to set the hostname
on windows machines that way without having to rely or hope that the netbios name
is set the same which can cause many problems.
This works great and helps maintain your hostnames and DNS records in
sync across your network like Whatever stated.
You CAN override or basically 'ignore' this DHCP server sent
parameter on the client end with the -h and -R.
There are more DHCP server options that can be sent down the wire to the
client. Anyone interested read the dhcpd and dhcpcd man pages or
search Google for "dhcpd.conf" and "options" search goolge or even the
dhcpd man page
On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
Changing our own config is no problem. But the main issue is, should we
allow a public utility type dhcp to change our hostname?
