I had to install 5.5 from scratch and now I have to rebuild my home networking system. I haven't had to mess with this stuff in over 5+ years and I'm sure there may be better ways of doing it now. My liunx box acts as firewall/gateway for 2 other pcs. I was using a script from the Linux IP Masquerade HOWTO with ddclient (since I have a dynamic ip). Also, I don't think I need a full name server. Can I get by with a caching nameserver? Thanks!! Eddie
El mi?, 19-05-2010 a las 09:42 -0400, tdukes at sc.rr.com escribi?:> I had to install 5.5 from scratch and now I have to rebuild my home networking system. > > I haven't had to mess with this stuff in over 5+ years and I'm sure there may be better ways of doing it now. > > My liunx box acts as firewall/gateway for 2 other pcs. I was using a script from the Linux IP Masquerade HOWTO with ddclient (since I have a dynamic ip). > > Also, I don't think I need a full name server. Can I get by with a caching nameserver? >Yes, you don't need more than that for your home network.> Thanks!! > > Eddie > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-- Enrique Verdes <EVerdes at conatel.com.uy> Depto. de Ingenier?a - CONATEL S.A. Este mensaje es privado y confidencial y tiene como ?nico destinatario la persona a la que va dirigida. La responsabilidad de su contenido es del remitente y no de CONATEL. Si usted ha recibido este mensaje por error, tenga presente que le est? prohibido revelarlo, copiarlo o distribuirlo, debiendo avisar de inmediato al remitente y borrarlo de su sistema. El error de transmisi?n no implica renuncia a la privacidad y confidencialidad. This email is private and confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. The responsibility of its content is the sender's and not CONATEL'S. If you have received this email by mistake please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Its disclosure, copy or distribution is absolutely forbidden. The transmission error does not imply a waiver of privacy and confidentiality.
> I had to install 5.5 from scratch and now I have to rebuild my home > networking system.Oy!> > I haven't had to mess with this stuff in over 5+ years and I'm sure there > may be better ways of doing it now.Unless you're dealing with many systems all the time, that's the way it always is. I got openLDAP (gag!) working in '06, and upgraded in '08, but I'd have to do heavy research to redo that today.> > My liunx box acts as firewall/gateway for 2 other pcs. I was using a > script from the Linux IP Masquerade HOWTO with ddclient (since I have a > dynamic ip).Have you run Bastille on the firewall/gateway?> > Also, I don't think I need a full name server. Can I get by with a caching > nameserver?I never set one up, and have been meaning to for a while. I'm interested in the answer. mark
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 9:42 AM, <tdukes at sc.rr.com> wrote:> I had to install 5.5 from scratch and now I have to rebuild my home networking system. > > I haven't had to mess with this stuff in over 5+ years and I'm sure there may be better ways of doing it now. > > My liunx box acts as firewall/gateway for 2 other pcs. I was using a script from the Linux IP Masquerade HOWTO with ddclient (since I have a dynamic ip). >Though there are many benefits to running gateway services through a Linux system, for the past couple years I've opted for an inexpensive wireless router that has been properly secured. It came down to power utilization as the Linux machine used about 10 times as much power as the dedicated router. As to benefits, I do run a Squid proxy server on my network. My internet connection is not the fastest and I've seen pretty good cache hit percentage (hovering near 30%-50%).> Also, I don't think I need a full name server. Can I get by with a caching nameserver?Yes, certainly. However, there are some benefits to running a full nameserver especially if you have any wireless devices that may need to use printers, file servers, etc.. For example, I can connect a wireless laptop and print to HPLaser1 or access the fileshare as \\fileserver\. When I change the fileserver it's a simple matter of pointing my alias over to the new server.
On 5/19/2010 8:42 AM, tdukes at sc.rr.com wrote:> I had to install 5.5 from scratch and now I have to rebuild my home networking system. > > I haven't had to mess with this stuff in over 5+ years and I'm sure there may be better ways of doing it now. > > My liunx box acts as firewall/gateway for 2 other pcs. I was using a script from the Linux IP Masquerade HOWTO with ddclient (since I have a dynamic ip). > > Also, I don't think I need a full name server. Can I get by with a caching nameserver?If you are starting from scratch and don't know your way around the linux system, why not use one of the 'appliance' style distributions like ClearOS (fairly new) or SMEserver (older but still works)? These are based on CentOS code but have a simple web interface for configuration and will probably set up the firewalling/NAT better than you would do by yourself. But to answer your question - the only difference between the caching nameserver package and a normal nameserver is that the caching version will overwrite your local configs on updates (since you shouldn't have made any changes). If you want to have a local zone for your own machines - even if it isn't official or public, you don't want the caching version. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com