Difference between running DNS/name resolution

[ajberry]

I am undertaking an enormous network redesign in an attempt to both teach myself Linux System Admin and sharpen some other skills. I thought this would be a good palce to start (DNS).

What I want to do:

firewall (shorewall, feel free to suggest)
run a Web Server (apache/php/mysql, ddclient for dyndns)
run an ftp Server ( open to suggestions )
Share files across platform (samba)

Have proper name resolution between all hosts.


hardware:

2 Windows
6 Linux
----------------
8 hosts ranging from 166 mhz - 2.4 ghz




Questions:

What is the difference between running DNS and having proper name resolution between all my hosts?



If you can recommend a good starting point that would be of great help also.

I plan on trying to authenticate against a Windows 2003 Server running Active Directory when all is said and done.

[Void Main]

DNS provides name resolution. You might want to look over my DHCP/Dynamic DNS page as it covers much of what you are asking:

http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/redhat/re ... c_dns.html

I use and like Shorewall for my iptables based firewall. Of course you can use Linux for your Apache/FTP server. I personally would use Apache for both web and file serving and not use an ftp server if you can get away with it. Can't help you with the Win2k3 part as I have no plans of touching it. Maybe someone else can help you out there. We usually don't talk about [WL]indows operating systems here though. :) I suppose if someone wants to help you with the authentication part we can let it slide though. Hint, Samba/winbind/pam.

[ajberry]

kinda threw the win2k3 thing in there at the end as a feeler. I read a couple good articles on that and am pretty sure I can get that accomplished, but everything else has to be done first.

I looked at the tip, and even bought a few O'reilly books on DNS and Bind. I should have more time to go through it tomorrow.

Most likely there will be more questions then. Thanks.