1 |
On Sunday, 21 February 2021 22:23:00 GMT Grant Taylor wrote: |
2 |
> Hi, |
3 |
> |
4 |
> I'm reading Kerberos - The Definitive Guide[1] and it makes the |
5 |
> |
6 |
> following comment: |
7 |
> > And to make matters worse, some Unix systems map their own hostname |
8 |
> > to 127.0.0.1 (the loopback IP address). |
9 |
> |
10 |
> This makes me think that the local host name /shouldn't/ be included in |
11 |
> the 127.0.0.1 (or ::1) entry in the /etc/hosts file. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> However, according to the Gentoo AMD64 Handbook[2], we are supposed to |
14 |
> add the local host name to the 127.0.0.1 (and ::1) entry in the |
15 |
> /etc/hosts file. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> Will someone please explain why the Gentoo AMD64 Handbook ~> Gentoo (at |
18 |
> large) says to add the local host name to the 127.0.0.1 (or ::1) entry |
19 |
> in the /etc/hosts file? What was the thought process behind that? |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Incidentally, adding the local host name to the 127.0.0.1 (or ::1) entry |
22 |
> in the /etc/hosts file causes "hostname -i" to return 127.0.0.1 instead |
23 |
> of the IP address bound to the network interface. |
24 |
|
25 |
Isn't it a matter of simple logic? The loopback address is just that: the |
26 |
machine talking to itself, with no reference to the outside world. Whereas, |
27 |
while talking to other machines on the network its address is that of the |
28 |
interface. There's no connection between those two. |
29 |
|
30 |
-- |
31 |
Regards, |
32 |
Peter. |