[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 07/09/12 15:21, bad apple wrote:
A server is nice but requires a permanently on machine - not useful where there are an ad-hoc collection of machines (as my house is since my server went titsup. I find DSL routers go titsup here a lot - too much lightnin. - just have a handy hosts file to modify for a new machine...On 07/09/12 13:32, Gordon Henderson wrote:On Fri, 7 Sep 2012, paul sutton wrote:On 07/09/12 12:27, Gordon Henderson wrote:On Fri, 7 Sep 2012, paul sutton wrote:I just need to sync the file across the network now of course. Once the list is complete.Avoiding doing this is *exactly* what DNS was invented for )-:Just to add my 2 cents: if you have more than a couple of machines on your local network it's definitely worth setting up a DNS server. Everyone has their favourites of course, but you should avoid dnsmasq and especially bind, etc for your minimalistic setup - have a look at unbound. Small, simple and available for win/mac/linux (as simple as sudo apt-get install unbound on debian flavours). It's main advantage over other DNS servers is it's tiny size, simple setup and in 5 minutes you can have a local DNS server that does full recursive, authoritative, caching lookups (including DNSSEC). It is also security audited to an OpenBSD level of paranoia so you won't get any of the hideous flaws that bind frequently falls victim to. It is *much* easier to set up than any other DNS server I have used. There is an excellent setup guide for beginners here: https://calomel.org/unbound_dns.html Cheers
Tom te tom te tom -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq