martin wrote: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > > DNS-SD using unicast DNS seems reasonable to me too. > > If we can do without the avahi gunk, and use it in a way that is not > optimised for user driven browsing but for automated selection of > services, then it might work. > > > Looking closer at the RFC, the initial service queries do have an added > > overhead in that a layer of indirection is used (not SRV -> A, but > > instead PTR -> SRV + TXT -> A). But standard DNS optimizations apply, > > so SOA record should allow clients to preserve bandwidth through > > caching. > > Can we teach dnsmasq to push all the relevant records with the SOA record? > > > In other words: Install dnsmasq on the XOs, use plain standard DNS > > internally and on the wire, setup DNS-SD entries in a standard > > nameserver on the XS, and extend Sugar to support DNS-SD. > > > > I'd be happy to help compose standard BIND9 files, if that is what will > > be used on the XS. > > If we have a dnsmasq resident expert, I rather use your help > transitioning to dnsmasq (note - with several bits of weird dhcp > rules). There is no upside to BIND and plenty of downsides, starting > with the >25MB memory footprint.
i'm a big fan of dnsmasq, but be sure it will fulfill all your needs before doing too much work on it -- it's not quite a full-fledged DNS server -- as an example, dnsmasq doesn't support CNAME: http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2006q1/000583.html > - ask interesting questions simon kelley (dnsmasq author) is extremely helpful on the dnsmasq list, btw, so it shouldn't be too hard to get interesting answers, as well. :-) paul =--------------------- paul fox, p...@laptop.org
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel