Liam Proven schreef op 25-11-2017 17:24:
> [[Utter clueless nonsense snipped]]
You skip everything that is technical and relevant.
Such as this link:
Or this fragment by Lennart Poettering:
"Sounds like a good idea. Could you please bring this to the attention
of the Debian/Ubuntu folks who ship that .local detection script? (To
my knowledge the other distros still don't, though they should)
>> Explain to me why mdns needs to block .local from getting out.
> You very obviously do not understand enough about networking to even
> understand if I did explain in more detail than I already have.
Or maybe you just don't understand the point I am making.
It's because you are fuming too much because some kid has the audacity
to challenge you.
> [[More clueless and totally wrong-headed ranting snipped]]
>>> NetBIOS needs name resolution over TCP/IP v4
>> No it doesn't.
>> Or at least it doesn't require DNS if that is what you mean.
> Yes it does. I DO THIS FOR A LIVING. I KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT.
You are saying that NetBIOS requires port 53 DNS to do name resolution
This is the NBF part:
"In order to start sessions or distribute datagrams, an application must
register its NetBIOS/NetBEUI name using the name service. To do so, an
"Add Name Query" or "Add Group Name Query" packet is broadcast on the
network. If the NetBIOS/NetBEUI name is already in use, the name
service, running on the host that owns the name, broadcasts a "Node
Conflict" message on the network.
In addition, to start a session or to send a datagram to a particular
host rather than to broadcast the datagram, NBF protocol has to
determine the MAC address of the host with a given NetBIOS/NetBEUI name;
this is done by sending a "Name Query" packet, the response to which
will have the MAC address of the host sending the response, i.e. the
host with that name."
So that's not TCP/IP.
But it's almost exactly the same as mDNS.
This is the TCP/IP part:
"In addition, to start a session or to send a datagram to a particular
host rather than to broadcast the datagram, NBT will have to determine
the IP address of the host with a given NetBIOS name; this is done by
broadcasting a "Name Query" packet, and/or sending it to the NetBIOS
name server. The response will have the IP address of the host with that
This is talking about the server (WINS) you mentioned.
It also says that this server is not required, just faster.
You have been proven wrong again.
"It is interesting to note that NBNS is one of the first proper dynamic
peer-to-peer distributed name registration services. The NBNS protocol
was brought into disrepute by Microsoft: it earned a bad name for being
'chatty', swamping networks with dynamic registration traffic on
multiple protocols (IPX/SPX, NBF and TCP/IP) as people badly
misconfigured their machines and their networks. The principles
implemented in NBNS have been reimplemented many times, including in
such systems as ZeroConf and MobileIP."
So you are wrong.
NBNS does not need a central server, it just works better that way.
Facts LIAM. Not bragging and screaming.
> YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. IT IS MY LIVING. YOU ARE
> TRYING TO TELL ME MY JOB.
Wikipedia proves you wrong.
> [[More irrelevant nonsense trimmed]]
You skip all the parts that prove me right.
You're a bad loser LIAM.
You have skipped all of my technical ideas.
You know you have lost, or I know why you are screaming here,
and you scream the loudest over the stuff that proves you wrong.