>> ZKT has some rudimentory support of views, but it sadly does not work >> with shared keys. > > I was afraid of this. Indeed, I thought several times about how to integrate this, but it doesn't fit very well in the whole concept of ZKT.
>> The more general approach is to use different zones for internal (eg.
>> "int.example.com") and public ("example.com") usage. With this kind of
>> setup it is always obvious with which host you want to communicate
>> (www.example.com, or www.int.example.com).
>>
>> And if you "really" want to have the "smartness" of using the same name,
>> even if you are in the internal or external network, you can setup a
>> searchlist in the internal network, but this has it's own security flaws.
>>
>> And if we are talking about IPv6: There is no longer a need for private
>> address space, and then no need for "private" name space as well.
>
> We talked yesterday with colleague with the very similar result.
> Unfortunately our internal zone is very huge thousands of records. :(
> This is our history burden. Moving internal records into sub-domain will
> be very tedious work and long run.
Maybe it's easier to move the public ones into a new domain (like
"example.net")?
> Thank you very much for thorough analysis and valuable information!
You're welcome.
Holger
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=190641631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________ zkt-users mailing list zkt-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/zkt-users
