Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Move 'dnssec time check enable' from SIGHUP to SIGUSR2

> On 15 Jan 2018, at 23:27, Simon Kelley wrote: > > >> >> Beyond “gaaahh why didn’t I think of SIGINT”….. excellent. Understand >> the reasoning, agree, running chez Kevin and backport for LEDE master >> submitted. >> > > and there's still SIGQUIT available!

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Move 'dnssec time check enable' from SIGHUP to SIGUSR2

> > Beyond “gaaahh why didn’t I think of SIGINT”….. excellent. Understand > the reasoning, agree, running chez Kevin and backport for LEDE master > submitted. > and there's still SIGQUIT available! Out of interest, how does the LEDE plumbing deal with a restart of dnsmasq _after_ ntp

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Move 'dnssec time check enable' from SIGHUP to SIGUSR2

> On 14 Jan 2018, at 22:12, Simon Kelley wrote: > > Right, I thought about this again, and concluded that whilst sharing the > "now use the time" function with something other than "reload loads of > stuff" is an improvement, it doesn't really get us that much farther

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Move 'dnssec time check enable' from SIGHUP to SIGUSR2

Right, I thought about this again, and concluded that whilst sharing the "now use the time" function with something other than "reload loads of stuff" is an improvement, it doesn't really get us that much farther to share with something else, since conflicts could still arise. For instance

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Move 'dnssec time check enable' from SIGHUP to SIGUSR2

> > > Am I waiting on you or are you waiting on me (to produce some laughably awful > code that you’ll fix up anyway) :-) And for the purposes of a jolly good laugh….. :-) 0001-dnsmasq-user-select-dnssec-time-valid-signal.patch Description: Binary data signature.asc Description: Message

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Move 'dnssec time check enable' from SIGHUP to SIGUSR2

> On 3 Jan 2018, at 12:34, Simon Kelley wrote: > > Happy new year all. > > > "Ideally dnsmasq would have some other IPC mechanism for indicating > 'time is valid, go check dnssec timestamps'" > > > I suspect I know that answer to this, but dnsmasq _does_ have