Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!GYRE.UMD.EDU!chris
From: chris@GYRE.UMD.EDU (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Domain Name Screaming
Message-ID: <8907051634.AA10945@gyre.umd.edu>
Date: 5 Jul 89 16:34:55 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 33


	From: phri!roy@rutgers.edu  (Roy Smith)

	... Yes, for some applications, YP is a big loose [sic] and you
	need to go full-frontal DNS.  But just because a new and better
	tool comes along doesn't mean you should completely throw out
	the old ones; for some applications they might actually be
	better.

YP and the domain system are completely different beasts, and should
never be asked to talk to each other.  Host name service should be DNS
based, except for isolated nets (here one might want to use YP simply
because it makes for one less thing to learn).  Here is why.

The domain service system is a fully distributed database.  It deals
with such issues as network partitioning and multiple administration
(to the tune of thousands of individuals or groups administering their
own part of the database).

YP is a centralised authoritarian database.  It can, to some extent,
handle a partitioned network, but it does not allow independent
administration.  It believes in a master/slave relationship; and
for someone to be able to set up (e.g.) password or printer service
one needs to be the master.  By definition, everyone else is a slave.

Distributed and centralised databases just do not mix.

One caveat:  We have never used YP at all here (at the CS Department;
there are other groups at the College Park campus that do use YP), so
in some cases I am speaking through a metaphorical hat.  No doubt if
I am wrong we will all hear about it.

Chris