On 2022-10-18, William Edwards wrote:
> Grant Edwards schreef op 2022-10-18 15:50:
>> If there is no domain name for a network, then it seems logical to not
>> use a domain name for that network. Making up a fake one which might
>> later conflict with a real, external, domain seems like the
Grant Edwards schreef op 2022-10-18 15:50:
On 2022-10-18, William Edwards wrote:
Grant Edwards schreef op 2022-10-18 03:03:
All of the examples I see for setting up dnsmasq on networks without
a
"real" domain always say to choose a "fake" local domain (e.g. .lan,
.home.arpa, .local, etc.).
On 2022-10-18, William Edwards wrote:
> Grant Edwards schreef op 2022-10-18 03:03:
>
>> All of the examples I see for setting up dnsmasq on networks without a
>> "real" domain always say to choose a "fake" local domain (e.g. .lan,
>> .home.arpa, .local, etc.). Then you also configure dnsmask to
Grant Edwards schreef op 2022-10-18 03:03:
All of the examples I see for setting up dnsmasq on networks without a
"real" domain always say to choose a "fake" local domain (e.g. .lan,
..home.arpa, .local, etc.). Then you also configure dnsmask to treat
that domain as local so that requests for
All of the examples I see for setting up dnsmasq on networks without a
"real" domain always say to choose a "fake" local domain (e.g. .lan,
..home.arpa, .local, etc.). Then you also configure dnsmask to treat
that domain as local so that requests for that domain are never
forwarded.
Why?
Are you
On 2022-10-18, Grant Edwards wrote:
> Are you not allowed to have have an empty domain so that "plain"
> hostnames are satisfied locall (e.g. from /etc/hosts and the DHCP
> leases) and only requests with a domain are forwarded to the external
> server?
Are there DHCP clients that fall over if
