Re: hostname is being reset, killing net on reboot
On Mon 24 Jan 2022 at 10:39:01 -0600, David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 23 Jan 2022 at 15:01:09 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 07:09:27PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> > > On Sun 23 Jan 2022 at 13:53:01 -0500, gene heskett wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, January 23, 2022 1:26:56 PM EST Felix Miata wrote:
> > > > > Greg Wooledge composed on 2022-01-23 08:42 (UTC-0500):
> > > > > > On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 08:50:56AM +0100, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > > > > >> As far as I can tell (with my limited understanding of DNS) it only
> > > > > >> makes it easier to share /etc/hosts with no obvious downside.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If that actually works, that's great news for Gene. It means he can
> > > > > > duplicate a single /etc/hosts file across all systems without needing
> > > > > > to bolt on a unique per-system header afterward.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've been sharing the very same hosts file among all my PCs for well
> > > > > over a decade, probably closer to two.
> > > >
> > > > And I have been for 2 decades and change as it once had an amiga as one
> > > > of its clients.
> > >
> > > What advice would you give to a user regarding the benefits of a hosts
> > > file as opposed to more modern techniques?
> >
> > I'll treat this question as "static interface configuration and hosts
> > files".
> >
> > The advantage is that it's conceptually simpler.
> >
> > The disadvantages are numerous.
> >
> > * Adding a new host, or changing a host's IP address, requires
> > platform-specific knowledge on the host in question. On a
> > heterogeneous network, that means you need knowledge of how to do
> > this on all the different platforms. This may include devices like
> > printers, where it's quite difficult, maybe even impossible, to
> > configure an address without DHCP.
> >
> > * After a change is made, it has to be replicated across your entire
> > network. Manually.
> >
> > * Any "visitor" machines that are temporarily added to your network will
> > need to be configured manually, and they will have zero knowledge of
> > the other hosts on the network. Even if you know their names, there
> > won't be any DNS in which you can look up their addresses.
> >
> > For anyone setting up a new home network, I'd recommend using DHCP. It
> > will be a lot simpler in the long run, especially if you start adding
> > wireless devices (cell phones, tablets, TV streaming devices, etc.).
> > Your router probably already acts as a DHCP server, so all you need to
> > do is learn how to configure fixed addresses for specific computers (and
> > printers) that want to act like servers. The other devices can just get
> > random addresses. Guest machines can just be connected and start working
> > without issues.
>
> Yes, I'd agree with all those arguments for DHCP, which is why I use
> it, hence its inclusion in my post at the top of this subthread, and
> why I can't understand Gene's aversion to it. But that's all about
> configuration, and the quoted comment at the top of this post is AIUI
> about /resolving/ hostnames through /etc/hosts.
Resolving hostnames on the local network is simple and reliable when
avahi-daemon and linnss-mdns are available.
brian@desktop:~$ getent hosts envy4500.local
192.168.7.235 envy4500.local
Continually and nanually maintain /etc/hosts? Not in 2022!
--
Brian.
Reply to: