Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Documented Redundancy?
On 31/07/14 13:23, Simon Kelley wrote: > On 30/07/14 07:35, Joel Krauska wrote: >> I've seen a few interesting proposals for running dnsmasq in a redundant >> way. >> (running active/passive and trying to keep leases updated atomically, eg. >> using a db) >> >> But I haven't seen an actual implementation documented anywhere. >> >> Those concepts mostly 'address' setting up a standby dhcp server, but I'm >> also interested in a secondary DNS server implementation using dnsmasq, and >> I can't seem to find detailed documentation on that either. >> >> Just in case anyone is wondering 'why' -- machines need package updates and >> occasional rebooting. I'd very much like to be able to temporarily take >> down my primary dhcp/dns infra with minimal impact. >> >> I've used isc and bind, and frankly it's a PITA to manage and maintain. >> >> I really like the simplicity of dnsmasq, but I'd also like some manageable >> redundancy? >> >> Is there a blog post out there that I just can't seem to find? :) >> >> If not, I guess I'll have to try to make one myself. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Joel Krauska > > I'm not aware of anybody having done this and documented it. We are working on the idea, and have made progress, but don't have it 100% working yet, and definitely not documented it if anyone wants to dig into the ongoing development, https://github.com/libre-mesh/lime-packages/tree/master/packages/dnsmasq-lease-share > The insight > that you don't really need redundancy for DHCP, only DNS is a valid one. Our scenario is actually more like "master to master" sincronization: two or more active DHCP servers on the same (pseudo)link-local. This specific need might only make sense in batman-adv mesh networks, but i guess it could be adapted to the master/slave case the OP is asking about Cheers! > Maybe it would work to have a secondary dnsmasq configured only for DNS, > and make the primary maintain a file in /etc/hosts file format with the > DHCP hosts and their addresses. The DHCP script is provided with enough > information to maintain a complete lease database, so just the > names/addresses would be quite possible. Moving that file from master to > slave left as an exercise for the reader :) > > Cheers, > > Simon. > > > > ___ > Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list > Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk > http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss > ___ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Documented Redundancy?
On 30/07/14 07:35, Joel Krauska wrote: > I've seen a few interesting proposals for running dnsmasq in a redundant > way. > (running active/passive and trying to keep leases updated atomically, eg. > using a db) > > But I haven't seen an actual implementation documented anywhere. > > Those concepts mostly 'address' setting up a standby dhcp server, but I'm > also interested in a secondary DNS server implementation using dnsmasq, and > I can't seem to find detailed documentation on that either. > > Just in case anyone is wondering 'why' -- machines need package updates and > occasional rebooting. I'd very much like to be able to temporarily take > down my primary dhcp/dns infra with minimal impact. > > I've used isc and bind, and frankly it's a PITA to manage and maintain. > > I really like the simplicity of dnsmasq, but I'd also like some manageable > redundancy? > > Is there a blog post out there that I just can't seem to find? :) > > If not, I guess I'll have to try to make one myself. > > Cheers, > > Joel Krauska I'm not aware of anybody having done this and documented it. The insight that you don't really need redundancy for DHCP, only DNS is a valid one. Maybe it would work to have a secondary dnsmasq configured only for DNS, and make the primary maintain a file in /etc/hosts file format with the DHCP hosts and their addresses. The DHCP script is provided with enough information to maintain a complete lease database, so just the names/addresses would be quite possible. Moving that file from master to slave left as an exercise for the reader :) Cheers, Simon. ___ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
[Dnsmasq-discuss] Documented Redundancy?
I've seen a few interesting proposals for running dnsmasq in a redundant way. (running active/passive and trying to keep leases updated atomically, eg. using a db) But I haven't seen an actual implementation documented anywhere. Those concepts mostly 'address' setting up a standby dhcp server, but I'm also interested in a secondary DNS server implementation using dnsmasq, and I can't seem to find detailed documentation on that either. Just in case anyone is wondering 'why' -- machines need package updates and occasional rebooting. I'd very much like to be able to temporarily take down my primary dhcp/dns infra with minimal impact. I've used isc and bind, and frankly it's a PITA to manage and maintain. I really like the simplicity of dnsmasq, but I'd also like some manageable redundancy? Is there a blog post out there that I just can't seem to find? :) If not, I guess I'll have to try to make one myself. Cheers, Joel Krauska ___ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
