Hm. I never received the original answer, so...
Am 03.07.2016 um 20:29 schrieb Marek Marczykowski-Górecki: > On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 02:30:15PM +0200, Alex wrote: >> On 07/02/2016 02:19 PM, Achim Patzner wrote: >>> Am I the only one who would like an integrated name service management >>> for local services that will be provisioned at the time of VM creation >>> (e. g. if you create a machine "builder" its assigned IP address could >>> be added to the locally running dnsmasq on the NetVM)? >> This somehow is against the principle of "isolation" between the >> AppVM... What about the aesthetic reason of not having to look at naked IP addresses in the outpit of traceroute? To be honest: I've missed more than once that a VM was not using the firewall VM I intended it to use and I guess seeing a symbolic name in the output would improve pattern recognition in human brains. And my next request will probably be a tool moving the entire address range Qubes is using somewhere else as 10.137/16 seems to be quite contested real estate. Achim -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/a0a3358d-30ea-719c-a1c4-a9d716a606ce%40noses.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
