| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 636.1 | are you specifying the right location | GOSTE::CALLANDER | | Fri Jan 18 1991 13:53 | 13 |
|
Make sure that if you are trying to reuse a previously registered
entity, that you reference it using the correct location in DNS.
An example is, I registered my node4s in the dna_node directory.
When I tried to add them into a new map later, I kept getting an
error on the synonm. I simply added the dna_node prefix to the node
name and it found it.
I don't know if this is your problem but see if it helps.
jill
|
| 636.2 | | NSSG::R_SPENCE | Nets don't fail me now... | Fri Jan 18 1991 17:50 | 7 |
| I am using the correct names. I really am getting an access error from
DNS. I found the problem today by trial and error and discovered that
to add a entity to a domain, the user required WRITE access to the
DNS Entity. That is going to make separation of authority tough.
s/rob
|
| 636.3 | pls. review this access req. | JETSAM::WOODCOCK | | Wed Jan 23 1991 14:46 | 24 |
|
I am using the correct names. I really am getting an access error from
DNS. I found the problem today by trial and error and discovered that
to add a entity to a domain, the user required WRITE access to the
DNS Entity. That is going to make separation of authority tough.
> Seperation of authority being tough is an understatement. This implies
> that *all* MCC users need WRITE access to the objects and nodes. For DEC:
> this would be an immense task of setting up access even if given
> permission (which I doubt would happen due to security guidelines). Also,
> the amount of effort to set this access may not be fully understood if
> applied corporate wide. In previous notes it was mentioned that a "good"
> method of setting up the directories would be on an area by area basis.
> This would mean 64 directories to contain all the nodes and granted this
> would be a good method. But reality is that DEC: is not set up this way
> and MCC should not assume other NSs are going to be either. In DEC: the
> directories are set up by "site". There are 580 site directories!!!
> Therefore there is a lot of effort involved in setting up this access
> and keeping it straight and secure.
> Is there a legitimate need for this access and is it going to be reviewed???
brad...
|
| 636.4 | Answering Rob's basic question | WORDY::JONG | Steve Jong/T and N Publications | Mon Feb 04 1991 14:52 | 2 |
| By the way, I saw a good summary of the DNS access rights required by
DECmcc -- in the DNS documentation.
|
| 636.5 | | NSSG::R_SPENCE | Nets don't fail me now... | Fri Feb 08 1991 16:43 | 5 |
| Oh boy! Which manual?
Thanks
s/rob
|
| 636.6 | Oops! Not DNS book at all | WORDY::JONG | Steve Jong/T and N Publications | Mon Feb 11 1991 10:00 | 2 |
| Actually, the writeup I saw was in _DECmcc Installation_, page 1-10.
One of us should have known that, Rob 8^)
|