Mike Gerdts writes:
> On Dec 3, 2007 5:43 AM, James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It doesn't always work very well, which is why I generally recommend
> > against /etc/netmasks.  It may have been an ok interface 20 years ago,
> > but with CIDR, it's mostly a defect looking for a place to happen.
> If using only a local netmasks file, it works quite well.  I much
> prefer to have one authoritative netmasks file per system than having
> system administrators specifying the mask every time "addif ..." is
> added to /etc/hostname.* or a zone is created.

Besides the look-up ambiguity, there are also the chicken-and-egg
problems that occur when users accidentally configure the system to
use NIS or some other directory service for netmask resolution.
Trying to configure an interface using a service that's reachable only
by talking on that interface doesn't work very well unless the
protocol was designed to be used that way -- and NIS was not.  In
fact, at least inside Sun, it's a somewhat common way to produce
apparent "hangs" on boot.

> For configuring IP addresses on the typical machine bolted to a rack
> or sitting on a desk, /etc/netmasks is quite manageable, stable, and
> desirable.

I much prefer DHCP or BOOTP for these cases.  It's centrally managed,
so you don't have to tweak each machine to have the right information,
and it's standards-based, so you can integrate with other systems.
Don't let the "dynamic" word in the name get in the road; whether the
addresses are dynamic or stable over time is a matter of
administration, not a requirement of the protocol.

But it's your network.  Even if I don't like /etc/netmasks, it's a
supported, stable interface, and it's not going anywhere.

James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677
zones-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to