Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [suggestion] tiny embedded web server

2011-07-02 Thread Ed W
On 29/06/2011 14:21, Jon Nelson wrote: LIGHTTPD: http://www.lighttpd.net/ After a fair bit of trouble with lighttpd, I cannot recommend it over Apache. It's also not really in the small, mostly embeddable category. I think the modern conclusion is that nginx is smaller, faster and better

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [suggestion] tiny embedded web server

2011-07-02 Thread Ed W
P.S. I did have an (evil?) :D thought of investigating how I could go about merging the two file source code within 'dnsmasq', but that will have wait for now (Hardly any time) :) Given that Mongoose claims to be around 40KB (ie not entirely featherweight), what are you hoping to gain by

[Dnsmasq-discuss] URL redirection

2011-07-02 Thread Tomas Sironi
Hi people. I'm sure someone has already asked about this, but i wonder if dnsnasq is capable of redirect secified url's. For example, I want all the queries to facebook.com to go to myserver.dyndns.org. The syntax would be: address=/facebook.com/myserver.dyndns.org Dnsmasq sholud resolv

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] URL redirection

2011-07-02 Thread Lee Maisel
H... Can't imagine what he's up to... LOL Tomas Sironi wrote: Hi people. I'm sure someone has already asked about this, but i wonder if dnsnasq is capable of redirect secified url's. For example, I want all the queries to facebook.com http://facebook.com to go to myserver.dyndns.org

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] URL redirection

2011-07-02 Thread Lee Maisel
Oh! Sorry, LOL that makes sense. So instead of just blocking AD sites for your network, have it go to something that loads quick or redirect, to avoid the ads. Great Idea! Lee Tomas Sironi wrote: Ok, I know. Facebook is not the best to put as example. I don't want to make phishing.

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] URL redirection

2011-07-02 Thread richardvo...@gmail.com
And here I was thinking block access to facebook from the company network. But DNS wouldn't exactly be the best way to do so. On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Lee Maisel mai...@lobo.net wrote: Oh! Sorry, LOL  that makes sense.  So instead of just blocking AD sites for your network, have it