Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] bugs.gentoo.org and dnssec

2015-04-28 Thread Michael Tremer
Hello, I am not sure if I am experiencing the same bug here or if it is somewhat different. When I try accessing some domains that use DNSSEC (like ipfire.org does, but this applies to other as well), I sometimes get SERVFAIL. This happens usually for bigger replies where fragmentation comes

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] bugs.gentoo.org and dnssec

2015-04-22 Thread Simon Kelley
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 21/04/15 21:51, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On 21 April 2015 at 21:41, Simon Kelley si...@thekelleys.org.uk wrote: Thanks for the report. I just tested 2.72 and the current code in git, and both worked fine, using Google public DNS (8.8.8.8) as

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] bugs.gentoo.org and dnssec

2015-04-21 Thread Simon Kelley
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Thanks for the report. I just tested 2.72 and the current code in git, and both worked fine, using Google public DNS (8.8.8.8) as upstream. What do you know about the upstream server you're forwarding to? Is there a possibility that it's fiddling

[Dnsmasq-discuss] bugs.gentoo.org and dnssec

2015-04-21 Thread Alon Bar-Lev
Hi, When using bugs.gentoo.org with dnsmasq-2.72 and dnssec enabled, I cannot access attachments. The attachments are forwarded to a CNAME, for example: --- 546330.bugs.gentoo.org. 60 IN CNAME bugs-gossamer.gentoo.org. bugs-gossamer.gentoo.org. 300 IN CNAME

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] bugs.gentoo.org and dnssec

2015-04-21 Thread Alon Bar-Lev
On 21 April 2015 at 21:41, Simon Kelley si...@thekelleys.org.uk wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Thanks for the report. I just tested 2.72 and the current code in git, and both worked fine, using Google public DNS (8.8.8.8) as upstream. I can confirm that using