Hi everyone.

I think it is handy to be able to delegate some suffix from internal
domain, lets say example.com provided by BIND or any bigger server. But
recursive servers do not set recursive queries on normal delegation.
Delegation is when I just add line into zone file:

$ORIGIN example.com.
dnsmasq-private IN A
private IN NS dnsmasq-private

Then query to xy.private.example.com would be forwarded to dnsmasq. It
is great this can be configured by dynamic update of a zone. No change
of configuration is necessary. It requires dnsmasq to be accessible by
recursive resolvers. Great for trusted network configuration.

Unfortunately, dnsmasq does not cooperate very well with them. Recursive
servers use queries without recursion desired flag set. Dnsmasq tends to
refuse it or servfail if any forwarder is configured. For each host it
reads from /etc/hosts or configured from DHCP, I think it would be nice
to respond also without recursion to every host from hosts. The same way
for DHCP assigned names. AFAIK it is denied to disallow cache probing.
What is point to deny provided names without recursion set, when it
gracefully offers it when recursion is desired?

compare when at least one server is set:
dig +rec mydnsmasqhost
dig +norec mydnsmasqhost

where mydnsmasqhost is hostname which obtained address from dnsmasq.

It just makes delegation from big resolvers difficult. Without auth-zone
with common prefix, it would not work. Is there a good reason for it? If
domain is set, it would be easy to create delegation without need to
auth-zone set.

My example would work if --auth-zone=private.example.com would be used.
While it is better, why should not --domain private.example.com be
sufficient? It would be quite useful for VM configuration, because
current libvirt does not support adding auth-zone to dnsmasq
configuration file.

Any comments welcome.

Have a nice day,

Petr Menšík
Software Engineer
Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/
email: pemen...@redhat.com  PGP: 65C6C973

Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to