Hi Jim, Thanks for that explanation, I kinda figured it might not be possible, but I thought it worth asking since I'm not an expert in that area.
Oh well... Thanks, Darren. James Carlson wrote: > Darren Kenny writes: >> Further to this - while it's currently the case that many people have >> different >> DNS and default domainname, I wonder if we (NWAM) should be undertaking a >> push >> towards using the same for both, in that by default DNS will also use the >> default domainname, but allow for a user (using advanced settings) to use a >> different one... > > I don't see how that's possible. > > It's the network administrator who chooses how to use these > attributes, not the NWAM user, so the NWAM user likely can't be > "pushed" to do anything but comply with what the powers-that-be > determine. > > In my case, I have to live with the way the IT folks who run the SWAN > manage things. My DNS domain is east.sun.com but my NIS domain is > ecd.east.sun.com. That's just how it is. If you push on me, I'll > point out that (a) I have no control over IT and (b) a design that > assumes I do is going to be hard and annoying to use. > > I think the real confusion here is just naming. The NIS "domain" has > nothing to do with a DNS "domain." There's no connection. You can't > meaningfully ask for <host>.<nisdomain> -- it makes no sense. You > also can't ask for the "passwd.byname" map inside <dnsdomain> -- that > doesn't exist. > > It's a *really* unfortunate accident of history that these entirely > different objects have been given very similar names. Even if you > subscribe to the erroneous religion based on the "hosts.byname" book, > it's not true that the entries in that book use the NIS domain as DNS > uses domains. They're just tokens -- just names -- entirely devoid of > what DNS would call a "domain." > > It sure would have been better for all if domainname had been called > the "NIS Administrative Area" or some such, but the time for fixing > that is long past. >
