DNS problems this morning - CORRECTION

[lee]

Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> writes:

> Am 15.11.2012 18:38, schrieb lee:
>> Tim <ignored_mailbox at yahoo.com.au> writes:
>> 
>>> Allegedly, on or about 12 November 2012, lee sent:
>>>> If you're using a chaching name server, you might not want the
>>>> "search" option.
>>>
>>> You probably do.  It, or a similar option, will be used so that "ping
>>> hostname" successfully translates into "ping hostname.domainname" on
>>> your network.
>> 
>> With dhcp and no resolving for local host names other than from what's
>> in /etc/hosts because the name server is only caching?
>
> you need to understand what "search" does
> it is independent from dhcp or anything else

I'm not saying it won't work.  My point is that there are three options
in this case:


1.) omit the search option
2.) put a non-existent domain into the search option
3.) put an existing domain into the search option


No. 2.) isn't useful, no. 3.) leads to unexpected results and
confusion[1] and therefore isn't very useful, either.  It leads to
unexpected results and confusion because who says that when someone does
'ping host' or something similar that they want to refer to any external
hosts?

So why specify a search option in this case?


[1]: unless it is your own domain, which doesn't apply in this case
     because there is none, and there is no name resolution for hosts on
     the LAN that would be part of such a domain so that 'ping host'
     won't work with 'search example.com' anyway, and that makes
     specifying the search option pointless because it will either not
     work or only lead to confusion and unexpected results which is why
     the OP might not want to use the search option with his
     caching-only name server


-- 
Fedora 17