On 31/05/12 08:47, Thomas Hood wrote: > In addition to devising an algorithm for dnsmasq to detect all and only > NNNs, the implementation of which will no doubt take a while, we should > consider implementing a quick fix too, along the lines suggested by > Sergio in #19. NM could be changed to do the following. > > "If the nameserver address list to be fed to dnsmasq contains one or > more local addresses followed by one or more non-local addresses then > run dnsmasq with the --strict-order option." > > I must confess that I am not sure what exactly should fall under "local > addresses" here. In IPv4 I presume that these would be the familiar > ranges 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12, 192.168.0.0/16, but what about IPv6?
I think you're right for IPv4. For IPv6, I'm tempted to treat it as a tabula rasa and explicitly not support NNNs. the rationale being that NNN support is to work around historical bad practice and such bad practice is not supported in the brave new world of IPv6. If that won't fly, then the IPv6 equivalent would be link-local (fe80::/64), site-local (fec0::/10) and ULAs (block fc00::/7), I think. > Nevertheless, I think we can safely proceed with this fix without being > sure that we have exactly the right definition of local address since > dnsmasq works no worse than libc in strict-order mode. > > ** Also affects: dnsmasq (Ubuntu) > Importance: Undecided > Status: New > > ** Also affects: resolvconf (Ubuntu) > Importance: Undecided > Status: New > -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop Packages, which is subscribed to network-manager in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842 Title: dnsmasq sometimes fails to resolve private names in networks with non- equivalent nameservers Status in “dnsmasq” package in Ubuntu: New Status in “network-manager” package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in “resolvconf” package in Ubuntu: New Bug description: A number of reports already filed against network-manager seem to reflect this problem, but to make things very clear I am opening a new report. Where appropriate I will mark other reports as duplicates of this one. Consider a pre-Precise system with the following /etc/resolv.conf: nameserver 192.168.0.1 nameserver 8.8.8.8 The first address is the address of a nameserver on the LAN that can resolve both private and public domain names. The second address is the address of a nameserver on the Internet that can resolve only public names. This setup works fine because the GNU resolver always tries the first- listed address first. Now the administrator upgrades to Precise and instead of writing the above to resolv.conf, NetworkManager writes server=192.168.0.1 server=8.8.8.8 to /var/run/nm-dns-dnsmasq.conf and "nameserver 127.0.0.1" to resolv.conf. Resolution of private domain names is now broken because dnsmasq treats the two upstream nameservers as equals and uses the faster one, which could be 8.8.8.8. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/+bug/1003842/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages Post to : desktop-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
