From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Oct  1 12:16:35 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA01961
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:16:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elvis.vnet.net (elvis.vnet.net [166.82.1.5])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01956
          for <freebsd-hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org>; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ponds.dignus.com (ponds.vnet.net [166.82.177.48])
          by elvis.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id PAA27548; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 15:15:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lakes.dignus.com (lakes [10.0.0.3])
	by ponds.dignus.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA22275;
	Wed, 1 Oct 1997 13:13:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.dignus.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) id NAA12603; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 13:04:12 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 13:04:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com>
Message-Id: <199710011704.NAA12603@lakes.dignus.com>
To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, tlambert@primenet.com
Subject: Re: r-cmds and DNS and /etc/host.conf
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Terry Lambert wrote:
> 
> > > Of course, you should feel free to suggest to us any soloution which
> > > does not require us to run named to implement.  And not feel free to
> > > suggest running named.
> > 
> > It doesn't require named to run.  I have reconstructed your setup, and
> > proven that my named doesn't get any request if the setup is done
> > correctly.  As i've mentioned, the only pitfall was specifying
> > localhost without adding the local domain, and with 127.1 instead of
> > 127.0.0.1 in /etc/hosts.
> 
> I didn't see this.  Perhaps this was the interval during which primenet
> had munged my MX record.  I will give it a try.
> 
> Technically 127.1 and 127.0.0.1 are synonymous; one would think the
> code should know this...

 Earlier discussions in the -hackers group (where I made a similar
point) came to the conclusion that support 127.1 was purposely
removed from the relavent library.  It was deamed to be a dropped
BSD-ism.


	- Dave Rivers -