Re: where is /etc/hosts supposed to come from?
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 03:18:51PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > I prefer to allocate such host names in a real domain, and give them just TXT
> > records or 127.0.1.1 A records in some weird cases where I can't trust the
> > box to not do idiotic things like go to the DNS bypassing the libc resolver.
Yes. This is certainly good thing to do. But how many people outside
of DD world have a real domain controlled by them which is usable for
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 11:11:00AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> I wouldn't use ".local" as that seems to be treated as a special case by
> zeroconf enabled computers, and various OS seem to have zeroconf enabled by
> default (like it or not).
I do this now expecting no name crash since I do not think I connect to
any host with the same host name and such domain name in my lan. (If
you are in zeroconf enabled lan and someone on the lan has the same host
name, isn't it a problem by itself?)
I know, according to rfc2606, "invalid" seems to be a choice for
the top level domain (TLD) to construct domain names that are sure to be
invalid from the Internet. But result is the same as choosing "local".
(This was a choice which I used to use.)
I summarized this at:
and the following section. If there is a better guideline for normal
people to follow, please give me pinter.