> members of SLUG umm, is that possibly "Sydney *Linux User Group* (*SLUG*) "? (http://slug.org.au/) or maybe the "Spokane *Linux Users Group* - [...] "? (http://www.spokanelinux.org/) ? -- Mike Schwartz Glendale AZ schwartz@acm.org Mike.L.Schwartz@gmail.com On 12/20/06, Dazed_75 wrote: > > WOW, thanks for all the input. Frankly most of the replies violate the > first criteria since most seem to require an always on computer system (and > while a router such as a Linksys WRT54 really is a computer, I do not count > it for that criteria). And the only solution I still see is the one of > using a router with dnsmasq. For example by using open-wrt on any of the > supported routers such as the wrt54gl (not the model I currently have). > > I am not sure Craigs message denigrating "appliance" devices applies to > something like open-wrt but I also do not know what djb is and a web search > was not revealing. I do know that dnsmasq allows you to choose lease > duration, and my linksys router does retain leases at least for their > duration. > > FYI, machines on my network run Ubuntu 6.06, 6.10, kubuntu 6.06, Windows > XP, 98SE, and sometimes Win ME, win2k, Mepis, SUSE 10.1, puppy, knoppix, > DSL, LFS, even tried Mandrake and gentoo. I have not run RedHat in years > but have run 4, 5, 6, 8, and even 9. Never ran Fedora. I probably add and > remove an average of two machines per week. LOW maintenance is critical. I > think a solutuion for me would also work for TONS of people with simpler > needs and for members of SLUG. That is why I would prefer the whole > enchilada be in an off-the-shelf router. I just have not found one with it > built in. > > On 12/20/06, Eric Shubes wrote: > > > > Craig White wrote: > > > On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 06:32 -0700, Eric "Shubes" wrote: > > >> Dazed_75 wrote: > > >>> I think I have found the answer. It looks to me like a router which > > has > > >>> dnsmasq functionality is exactly what I am looking for. It would > > have > > >>> been nice to find a no cost solution, but I think this is the right > > >>> answer. Looks like it meets all the criteria and beyond the initial > > >>> setup seems to be mostly maintenance free. > > >>> > > >>> For those that have a single machine sharing its network connection > > with > > >>> the rest of the LAN, they can do this totally with dnsmasq software. > > >>> > > >> L, > > >> I'm glad you've found something that meets your requirements. Three > > comments: > > >> > > >> 1) The first criteria was that no 'computers' are always turned on. I > > guess > > >> you're not including a router as a computer. Your DHCP/DNS server > > would > > >> *have* to be on all the time. ;) > > >> > > >> 2) A solution that's been working for me is IPCop (http://ipcop.org) > > on a > > >> formerly retired emachines 333mh box. Pretty much a firewall on > > steroids, > > >> IPCop provides a slew of neat features including DHCP and DNS > > (caching and > > >> local hosts) services. I use every feature available (except web > > proxy) to > > >> one extent or another. It's very easy to configure, as everything > > after > > >> initial NIC configuration (part of installation) is web based. > > However, > > >> TTBOMK IPCop does not have a way to automatically update DNS hosts > > from > > >> dynamic DHCP leases. It's very simple though to assign static IP > > addresses > > >> to servers in DHCP and add them to the DNS hosts file. At least all > > >> maintenance is consolidated this way, and is easy to do (gui web, > > from any > > >> machine that's running on the LAN). > > >> > > >> 3) While not necessarily a concern in the environment(s) you're > > addressing, > > >> updating DNS with dynamic DHCP leases can be a security risk in some > > >> (business) environments. I'm guessing this is why you don't see much > > of it > > >> going on. > > >> > > >> Just my .02 > > >> > > >> P.S. Samba might be more what you're looking for, but that only > > covers the > > >> DNS (name resolution) part. You'd still need a DHCP server available > > to hand > > >> out local IP addresses. > > > ---- > > > I definitely agree on ipcop but: > > > > > > - businesses definitely use dynamic dns with dhcp leases...that is > > > standard operational mode for Windows AD and even if using ISC's > > DHCPd, > > > Windows machines will try to do an RRSET on the dns server. I > > routinely > > > use ISC's DHCPd and BIND and routinely use dynamic updating and set > > the > > > appropriate ACL's > > > > Agreed. However, Dazed's configuration isn't using Windows AD. > > > > > - Samba doesn't do DNS resolution by default, but uses NetBIOS and > > WINS > > > resolutions which are clearly not DNS, don't provide fqdn (fully > > > qualified domain name) and not appropriate for resolution on typical > > > tcp/ip based services. > > > > I'm thinking that Dazed's LAN would not need fqdn's. Perhaps I'm > > mistaken. > > Your point that samba is not a robust DNS solution is certainly valid > > though. > > > > > - While I don't recall ipcop's web based interface having options for > > > ddns and I don't use ipcop to provide DHCP or DNS services, I can see > > > that the versions are more than capable of supporting ddns and can > > > easily be manually configured to do so. > > > > That'd certainly be worth looking into. It'd be a nice feature to > > request > > for the base distro too. > > > > > Craig > > > > > Thanks, Craig. The howto you referenced at http://www.brennan.id.au/looks > > very nice. > > > > -- > > -Eric 'shubes' > > --------------------------------------------------- > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - [...] > > > > [...] > --------------------------------------------------- > PLUG-discuss mailing list - [...]