"Dnsmasq cascade" (#72) has maintenance advantages. For example it
makes it easy for the distromaestros to switch to other software to
perform the same limited task as nm-dnsmasq now performs, without any
chance of disturbing admins' standalone dnsmasq setups.
Does dnsmasq-cascade have drawbacks compared with "Single dnsmasq" as
described by Alkis in #73?
Yes...
* Dnsmasq cascade requires that standalone dnsmasq run in bind-interfaces mode.
-- Solvable by moving nm-dnsmasq to another port:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14242
* Dnsmasq cascade requires two processes rather than one.
-- but resource usage is low so this doesn't seem important
But are there other drawbacks?
--
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/959037
Title:
NM-controlled dnsmasq prevents other DNS servers from starting
Status in “djbdns” package in Ubuntu:
New
Status in “dnsmasq” package in Ubuntu:
Confirmed
Status in “network-manager” package in Ubuntu:
Triaged
Bug description:
As described in
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-p-dns-
resolving, network manager now starts a dnsmasq instance for local DNS
resolving.
That breaks the default bind9 and dnsmasq installations, for people that
actually want to install a DNS server.
Having to manually comment out "#dns=dnsmasq" in
/etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf doesn't sound good, and if it stays
that way, it should be moved to the bind9 and dnsmasq postinst scripts.
Please make network-manager smarter so that it checks if bind9 or
dnsmasq are installed, so that it doesn't start the local resolver in
that case.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/djbdns/+bug/959037/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
