On Aug 28, 3:25 am, Pat Welch <pat...@inreach.com> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> With Unixware 7.1.x you can do scoadmin "DNS Manager" and setup your DNS
> server by answering questions.
>
> I expected to find it on 6.0.0 with MP2 and OSS706C after I installed it
> on an old Dell a client had available. No joy.
>
> The install itself went in without a hiccup, it even auto detected the
> 3com nic and the network came up like a champ after the install finished.
>
> Some background:
>
> Their Windows based DNS would not play nice with some software installed
> on an SCO 5.0.7 server that required a working local (behind the
> firewall) DNS.
>
> Their local Windows guy could not figure how to get their Windows DNS
> server to respond to (for example) nslookup, which also failed when run
> from an XP desktop. It seemed to me to be insisting on using only WINS
> and/or Netbios to resolve names.
>
> So I suggested trying OS6 on his old Dell and pointing the 5.0.7 server
> there for it's internal DNS lookups.
>
> I've never needed to setup a DNS sever on 6.0 before, but I had assumed
> that DNS Manager would be there since the kernel was based on Unixware.
>
> I really don't want to wade through the 6.0 docs that just explain a
> bazillion options without offering some examples of a common setup.
>
> Would the 7.1.4 DNS Manager work under 6.0? Or can someone point me to a
> web site with simple working DNS samples under 6.0? SCO's Knowledge
> base and online Docs had little or nothing to offer.
>
> TIA.
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Pat Welch, UBB Computer Services, a WCS Affiliate
> SCO Authorized Partner
> Unix/Linux/Windows/Hardware Sales/Support
> (209) 745-1401 Cell: (209) 251-9120
> E-mail: pat...@inreach.com
> ----------------------------------------------------

See TA 107297 for instructions on setting up named. There's no
Scoadmin manager for it that I'm aware of, although you can set up the
BIND DNS module of Webmin.

A broken Windows DNS, if that's what your client has, is going to be
trouble. IMHO better to fix that than to add a duplicate name service
on the network.

--RLR