Hello
A few (or a lot) of us supports larger corporate networks. I would like
know your opinion/solution based on CentOS. No Win auto/dynamic/smart
(WI|D)NS/DHCP
How do you manage DNS&DHCP (the informations filled in, not the server
software) for hundreds or thousands of computers?
For our network, just now we use homebrewed scripts, but they are
getting unsufficient (cca. 700 machines).
I found this:
http://sauron.jyu.fi/ = Sauron - A Free DNS & DHCP Management System
What are references for that? Good, bad, sufficient?
Do you use something similar?
Petr Kl?ma
JIHOMILK a.s.
Rudolfovsk? 246/83
370 50 ?esk? Bud?jovice
Czech Rpublic
phone: +420 389 136 209
e-mail: petr.klima at jihomilk.cz
> A few (or a lot) of us supports larger corporate networks. I would like > know your opinion/solution based on CentOS. No Win auto/dynamic/smart > (WI|D)NS/DHCPbind and dhcpd support dynamic dns.
Quoting Petr Kl??ma <petr.klima at jihomilk.cz>:> Hello > > A few (or a lot) of us supports larger corporate networks. I would like > know your opinion/solution based on CentOS. No Win auto/dynamic/smart > (WI|D)NS/DHCP > > How do you manage DNS&DHCP (the informations filled in, not the server > software) for hundreds or thousands of computers?ISC bind and ISC dhcpd work well together to do ddns updates. As a management tool, I recommend Webmin <http://www.webmin.com> which will do a lot more than DNS/DHCP for you. Barry
HI! Not sure if this is what you are looking for, but it may be of interest: http://probind.sourceforge.net/ cya, TR On Monday 13 June 2005 03:56, Petr Kl?ma wrote:> Hello > > A few (or a lot) of us supports larger corporate networks. I would like > know your opinion/solution based on CentOS. No Win auto/dynamic/smart > (WI|D)NS/DHCP > > How do you manage DNS&DHCP (the informations filled in, not the server > software) for hundreds or thousands of computers? > > For our network, just now we use homebrewed scripts, but they are > getting unsufficient (cca. 700 machines). > > I found this: > > http://sauron.jyu.fi/ = Sauron - A Free DNS & DHCP Management System > > What are references for that? Good, bad, sufficient? > Do you use something similar? > > > Petr Kl?ma > > JIHOMILK a.s. > Rudolfovsk? 246/83 > 370 50 ?esk? Bud?jovice > Czech Rpublic > > phone: +420 389 136 209 > e-mail: petr.klima at jihomilk.cz > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-- Todd Rittinger TLC Solutions www.tlcsolutions.ca
On 6/13/05 12:56 AM, Petr Kl?ma wrote:> Hello > > A few (or a lot) of us supports larger corporate networks. I would like > know your opinion/solution based on CentOS. No Win auto/dynamic/smart > (WI|D)NS/DHCP > > How do you manage DNS&DHCP (the informations filled in, not the server > software) for hundreds or thousands of computers?The problem with automating DHCP entries, from my view in the cheap seats, is that policies tend to differ widely enough from site to site to make generalizations difficult. Even within a site, it can get dicey. I've managed networks, for instance, where a. some hosts get a static address on their "home" subnet (typically, the one available at the user's desk) but are able to get a dynamic address on other subnets, like those available in conference rooms. b. some hosts only get dynamically allocated addresses, and only on a limited set of subnets. c. some hosts, mostly rack-mount machines, are treated like hosts in the first group above, but they get long leases on the home subnet and short leases on testing nets. d. some hosts, these of the dying breed of stationary desktop workstations, actually lived only on one subnet. As you know, only the last type had a single host entry in the final config files; the rest required at least two. We tried really hard to script all these policies, but our users were so creative at finding new DHCP niches where their machines "had" to live. In the end, vi[m] was the best tool, because it was just too hard (for us, anyway) to abstract DHCP usage policies well enough to encapusate them in scripts. Plus, in the end, the configuration entries didn't even resemble a DHCP config file, so all admins had to know their way around both production DHCP config files *and* our funky pre-production script-friendly configs. Feh! :-) -- Paul Heinlein <> heinlein at madboa.com <> www.madboa.com