Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:30:19 +0100 From: Hexren <me@hexren.net> To: Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re[2]: 4 part domain names Message-ID: <10516350570.20041124163019@hexren.net> In-Reply-To: <20041124152355.GD11648@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> References: <20041123233501.GA82229@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <5557305861.20041124004849@hexren.net> <20041124000014.GA83249@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <8763344284.20041124022927@hexren.net> <20041124141737.GA11648@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <5315017844.20041124160806@hexren.net> <20041124152355.GD11648@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
JM> On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 04:08:06PM +0100, Hexren wrote: JM> : location. 510 could identify a rack or a datacenter so that JM> : us.510.mail.example.com means "a mail server in the datecenter with JM> : the id 510 which serves the United States". JM> So 'us.510.mail' is an atomic, arbitrary identifier. All three as a unit JM> identify a certain node, and are selected purely for convenience of human JM> operators, right? I would say yes. JM> I'm just making sure that the network doesn't treat 'us.510.mail' any JM> different than it would treat 'foobar', right? I would say yes too. JM> I was thinking in java/python mode, where each 'dot-level' actually pointed JM> to a node in the network, while what I understand now is that once you go JM> beyond the domain name, the way you handle the other nodes is just up to the JM> sysadmin, and is purely for human readability, right? I would say yes yet again, only I do not know anything about python (exept the name) so I cannot really say anything about that. --------------------------------------------- Answers inline with the original Mail.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?10516350570.20041124163019>