Send connman mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/connman
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of connman digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: dnsproxy: invalid answer where there are no DNS servers
available (Nuno Gon?alves)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2019 19:02:45 +0200
From: Nuno Gon?alves <[email protected]>
To: Daniel Wagner <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: dnsproxy: invalid answer where there are no DNS servers
available
Message-ID:
<caexmxlsw8uqbypxfovp9ix3nktdsxraswd7ma++8qek5m+c...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hi,
I did hacked this to work for me, and it will take some substantial
work to upstream. Anyway I hope I can do it soon.
I do have a question on this subsystem, when compiling with
--with-dns-backend=systemd-resolved (instead of internal), what is the
intended behaviour for tether clients?
Currently I think they get no DNS server.
Should we send them the systemd-revolved upstream server?
Should dnsproxy be split into the proxy part and the caching part,
where the proxy will continue to be used to relay requests to
systemd-resolved?
Thanks,
Nuno
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 8:29 AM Daniel Wagner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Nuno,
>
> On 3/28/19 2:40 PM, Nuno Gon?alves wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Typing "ping abcd", where abcd does not exist on /etc/hosts or in the
> > search domains, will usually hang for a while with Connman.
> >
> > I've compared with other systems and my conclusion is that libnss_dns
> > is retrying the DNS request to connman, since connman answer does not
> > include the query field.
> >
> > This behaviour comes from [1], where both a invalid Query and no
> > upstream servers are handled in the same way.
> >
> > I believe the query field must be part of the answer when the Query
> > message was valid, but just happens to not be possible to resolve.
>
> Thanks for you report. Do you happen to have a patch for this? I suppose
> you have the setup already running for testing.
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
connman mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/connman
------------------------------
End of connman Digest, Vol 45, Issue 5
**************************************
