it's basically low budget HA.
"how can we swap out this server and not have it's IP hard coded into it's
config?"
(server = box hosing mmqt server)
Where its config is its local drive and conf files.
It lets the dhcp server control all the IPs. which may change over time,
and the server and
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019, at 7:41 AM, Simon Kelley wrote:
> I can see a strong argument that a query for a name which is configured
> as a CNAME in dnsmaq, but for a type which is not known to dnsmasq,
> should return a NODATA reply.
>
> In fact I can't see a downside to that.
>
> Anybody else?
>
>
On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 12:04:33AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Monday 30 September 2019 22:40:20 Geert Stappers wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 03:51:43PM +0100, Simon Kelley wrote:
> > >
> > > Now would be a good time to tell me
> > > all the stuff I should be dealing with.
> >
> > DHCPv6:
On 18/10/2019 12:51, Simon Kelley wrote:
> On 18/10/2019 12:41, Simon Kelley wrote:
>
>> The obvious way is to provide an record for the "local names". The
>> problem with that is it has to be real, or timeouts and stuff will
>> happen, so those hosts need to be dual-stack.
>>
>> I can see a
On 14/10/2019 23:05, Michael wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> I'm using ASUS Merlin 384.13, which is compiled with dnsmasq
> 2.80-44-g608aa9f, on my router. I have rebind protection on and want
> to whitelist "universal-web-internal.production.gannettdigital.com" as
> for some reason after upgrading to
On 13/10/2019 16:43, Matthias Andree wrote:
> Simon,
>
> dnsmasq 2.80 is apparently nearing its anniversary - what are the plans
> WRT stabilizing, touching up and releasing 2.81? It seems the Git has a
> nice collection of regression and other bug fixes.
>
> FreeBSD releases quarterly according
On 17/10/2019 02:41, Dominick C. Pastore wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm having a bit of a problem with the "cname" option in Dnsmasq. I have some
> configuration options like these in dnsmasq.conf, where "host1" and "host2"
> have IPv4 addresses from DHCP:
>
> domain=philadelphia.example.com
>
On 18/10/2019 12:41, Simon Kelley wrote:
> The obvious way is to provide an record for the "local names". The
> problem with that is it has to be real, or timeouts and stuff will
> happen, so those hosts need to be dual-stack.
>
> I can see a strong argument that a query for a name which is
