Resolution Order - dns/files or files/dns?

[Robert Weber]

> --------
> 
> > Steve Kelley wrote:
> > 
> > > HI,
> > >
> > > I had a quick question concering resolution order.
> > >
> > > Our clients have a very abbreviated local hosts file that
> > > typically contains "localhost" and the given "hostname".
> > >
> > > Would it be better to specify the resolution order used
> > > by the clients as "dns files" or "files dns"?
> > >
> > > I was thinking that "files dns" would be better, and
> > > eliminate some queries from hitting our DNS servers, but
> > > I was just wondering if there was any standard protocol
> > > in the community for defining the resolution order.
> > 
> > None that I'm aware of. Resolution order, and/or the use of
> > non-Internet-standards-based naming services, are generally considered
> > matters of local discretion.
> > 
> > 
> > - Kevin
> > 
> --------
> 
----------
This is just my $.02 but we always do "dns files" with our /etc/hosts
file around 2.2 Megs for our Class B.  File lookups can take quite a
while longer than dns and the dns traffic even for our entire network
is less than %3 of an ultra 10 333.  Even with a small hosts file there
is some file io wait on a file look up that appears to be non-existant
with bind.  Plus, if your lookup is "files dns" won't EVERY lookup go to
files first even if it is logically a bad idea?

						Robert Weber
						UnixOps
						University of Colorado