Re: where is /etc/hosts supposed to come from?
On 2009-12-31 14:34:34 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Uh, no. That statement implies nothing of the sort; identification is not
> necessarily unique.
I suggest that you look in a dictionary.
> I've been participating in standardization of network protocols through
> the IETF for more than a decade now, and I've never seen someone use this
> definition of FQDN that you're using. I'm quite confident that this is
> not the intented interpretation of the standards to which you're
> referring, in large part because I was participating in the mailing lists
> on which they were written.
This is not only me. "hostname -f" uses the same definition.
There's also the open problem of what "canonical name" means under
Debian / Linux. Some software also assumes the unicity of the FQDN
(under the "hostname -f" definition), and even the nodename (e.g.
that's procmail when storing mail in a Maildir mailbox).
Vincent Lefèvre <email@example.com> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arénaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)