| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 5304.1 | If you find out | LADDIE::TIBBERT | Lee Tibbert, DTN 226-6115 | Fri Mar 07 1997 17:30 | 12 |
|
If you find out, please let me know...
I've seen that message a couple of time, usually while setting
up new systems. When I got the systems correctly configured,
the message when away. I suspect that I eventually set things
up so that BIND would find the local host name. At least, I think
that message is saying "I could not find the local host name in DNS".
Now why it does not say that directly is another matter...
Lee
|
| 5304.2 | bind with "%UCX-S-NFS_SUBNAM ..." | PADNOM::CHEMINANT | | Fri Apr 18 1997 09:25 | 22 |
|
It seems this message appears with the $UCX SH PROXY command,
when :
some proxy records are non-dynamic, and some others are dynamic
for a same VMS-Username (ie. a record proxy is defined for
a VMS-Username with multiple Hostnames)
These proxy records appear to be non-dynamic,
either when the "%UCX-S-NFS_SUBNAM, Substitute hostname ..."
message is written into the UCX$NFS_logfile.log (Cf. Notes 4288.1)
either when the value of the logical name UCX$NFS_xxxx_HOSTS is
less than number of the hosts set for a record proxy.
More, when the bind Resolver is enabled, it appears that the display
of the '$UCX SH PROXY' takes a long time around these proxy records.
Sometimes, it appears that, in this case, the record proxy is
displayed as "ON?"
~
I hope this could help you.
Best regards.
Gait.
|
| 5304.3 | Thank you | LADDIE::TIBBERT | Lee Tibbert, DTN 226-6115 | Fri Apr 18 1997 13:21 | 15 |
|
Gait,
Thank you for the information. I'll file it
away for when I get some time to work in this area.
Yes, there are delays when NFS looks up unknown nodes
in DNS and has to wait for DNS to time out. The first
delay is pretty much unavoidable. Unfortunately,
the current algorithm can, I believe, repeat failing
lookups, possibly many times.
I'd love to see this entire proxy area re-worked someday.
Lee
|
| 5304.4 | IPMT ? | PADNOM::CHEMINANT | | Mon Apr 21 1997 04:26 | 3 |
| Is it necessary to you that I submit an IPMT level 3 ?
Best regards.
Gait.
|
| 5304.5 | Yes, please | LADDIE::TIBBERT | Lee Tibbert, DTN 226-6115 | Tue Apr 22 1997 13:21 | 9 |
|
An IPMT, even a level 3, would raise the probability
of this getting done. It would formally put it in
the queue of the new NFS maintainer and get it
out of my overloaded 'to do someday' list.
Thanks,
Lee
|
| 5304.6 | Thanks | padnom.evt.dec.com::CHEMINANT | | Mon Apr 28 1997 12:05 | 3 |
| Thanks.
Right, i'll do;
Gait.
|