To: | <nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | [nv-l] DNS or hosts file resolution |
From: | "Federico Vidal" <fvidal@tecsystem.com.ar> |
Date: | Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:40:53 -0300 |
Delivery-date: | Thu, 28 Oct 2004 13:48:46 +0100 |
Envelope-to: | nv-l-archive@lists.skills-1st.co.uk |
Reply-to: | nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com |
Sender: | owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com |
Thread-index: | AcS87F5FQSVuRgAZTPm0kBEn6eyAcQ== |
Thread-topic: | DNS or hosts file resolution |
Hello:
Does anyone has an idea or rule to follow when
deciding how to resolve names with Netview?
I'm aware
that Netview extensively uses name resoltion, especially with large databases.
This will affect DNS server performance if it is not a dedicated server.
Also I'm aware that very long /etc/hosts can cause
Netview delays. This option is also trickier because it is another thing to
maintain besides de DNS.
Both scopes have advantages and disadvantages.
My questions to the list are:
Is there a guideline or rule to follow when deciding when to use or not use the corporate DNS server? How large has to be the /etc/hosts file to hinder Netview's performance? What is the impact of Neview to the DNS server? Best Regards and thanks,
Federico Vidal
|
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | RE: [nv-l] dot1dbridge, Leslie Clark |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [nv-l] DNS or hosts file resolution, Paul |
Previous by Thread: | [nv-l] dot1dbridge, Leslie Clark |
Next by Thread: | Re: [nv-l] DNS or hosts file resolution, Paul |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd
See also: The NetView Web