<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Jul 6, 2007 3:21 PM, Per Hedeland <<a href="mailto:per@hedeland.org">per@hedeland.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">"Dmitrii 'Mamut' Dimandt" <<a href="mailto:dmitriid@gmail.com">dmitriid@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>><br>>I should really be careful when reading books :) :<br>><br>> "We can also use -sname on two different machines when they are
<br>> on the same subnet. Using -sname is also the only method that will<br>> work if no DNS service is available."<br><br></div>Uh, unfortunately basically everything in that quote is wrong. -name vs<br>
-sname is a matter of host/domain names, a concept that is quite<br>orthogonal to the concept of subnets. And -name works just fine without<br>DNS, as long as you put fully-qualified names in /etc/hosts or whatever<br>you're using. The erl(1) man page has it right of course, but is maybe a
<br>bit terse.<br><br>The important thing is that the hostname part of a node name must be<br>unique (among hosts), predictable, and usable by all involved. If your<br>Windows box thinks that its name is foo.WORKGROUP, while your Unix box
<br>thinks that the Windows box is called foo.your.domain, and has no idea<br>how to reach a host called foo.WORKGROUP, you will have problems. In<br>some cases they may agree on the "foo" part, which is where -sname helps
<br>(at the cost of messing things up when you want <a href="http://foo.example.org" target="_blank">foo.example.org</a> and<br><a href="http://foo.example.com" target="_blank">foo.example.com</a> to be able to communicate). But the Windows box may
<br>actually think that its name is DMITRIIS_COMPUTER, a name that isn't<br>known by anything outside (at best) the bunch of Windows boxes on your<br>network.<br><br>The clear and obvious way out of this mess is "everything should use
<br>DNS", which amazingly still seems to be a problem in the Windows world.<br><div class="Ih2E3d"><br>>Apart from that, Kirill Zaborski suggested that I directly write<br>><a href="mailto:nodename@host.ip">nodename@host.ip
</a>. So I ran<br>><br>> erl -name <a href="mailto:another_name@192.168.0.1">another_name@192.168.0.1</a><br><br></div>This is actually quite a good workaround when you have a "Windows mess"<br>- or for that matter a private home network where you can't be bothered
<br>to set up DNS or even distribute hosts files. Using IP addresses clearly<br>fulfills the unique&predictable&usable requirement. Unfortunately it's<br>not documented that you can specify the hostname part at all with -name,
<br>let alone that the IP address can be used for it (I think at least the<br>latter may actually be an "accidental" feature).</blockquote><div><br>This still doesn't work for me. I'm running Windows XP with Erlang
5.6; when I do:<br><br>erl -name <a href="mailto:foobar@192.168.1.102">foobar@192.168.1.102</a><br><br>I get a popup box saying "erl.exe has encountered a problem and needs to close." There are no other error messages. Has anyone else encountered this bug? Can anyone suggest how to workaround or diagnose the problem? Thanks.
<br><br>Dave<br><br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br><br>The downside is that there is zero sanity check on the hostname part,
<br>you can give anything you want there (whether name or IP address), and<br>so can easily create a different kind of mess.<br><br>--Per Hedeland<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>erlang-questions mailing list
<br><a href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@erlang.org</a><br><a href="http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions" target="_blank">http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
</a><br></blockquote></div><br>