Re: [nv-l] DNS or hosts file resolution

[ray.smith@clorox.com]

Federico,

Paul's suggestion is the rule we live by.  NetView relies heavily on Reverse Look-up so when you managed an object you actually have at least three transactions out the interface before the object has a host-name on your map.

We have increased our performance by working with our DNS Admin's.  They installed a secondary DNS server on our NetView box that only our Tivoli Framework uses.  No One else request from him except NV locally..  When DNS updates are performed he see's the updates automagic since he is a secondary of the primary name server in corporate.

This helps our organization in more than one way.  Since he is looking at servers and network devices in our environment, this provides a sanity check at a glance that all tiered infrastructure is indeed name resolvable.




"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered;
the point is to discover them. "

Ray Smith
Enterprise Systems Management
The Clorox Services Company

Paul <pstroud@bellsouth.net> Sent by: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com 10/28/2004 05:57 AM Please respond to nv-l

To:        nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com         cc:        (bcc: Ray Smith/US-Corporate/Clorox)         Subject:        Re: [nv-l] DNS or hosts file resolution

Federico,
One thing I might suggest is working with your DNS admins to
create a secondary DNS server on your NetView machine. Then
don't let anyone else request DNS from the NetView machine
except for NetView. You can also use a caching name server on
the local machine. You most likely do NOT want to update a hosts
file on a regular basis and it will also slow performance as the hosts
file gets largers.

Just a few things to think about.

Paul


Federico Vidal wrote:

> 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