On 2016/09/16 11:40, Ted Unangst wrote:
> Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
> > By the way, what do you think about TCP caching support? I could send
> > a patch to do just that.
Caching sounds complicated, DNS is a bit of a minefield to handle,
you have to cope with things like compression - not that
Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
> By the way, what do you think about TCP caching support? I could send
> a patch to do just that.
It seems unnecessary. tcp proxy support is there because it's necessary, but
not because i think it's likely to be used. i'm pretty sure i never use it,
except when i
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 09:09:44AM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
> Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I've put together a patch for 6.0-stable that adds domain name
> > matching support to rebound(8). The patch is quite rough at the
> > moment.
> >
> > The config is as follows:
> >
Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I've put together a patch for 6.0-stable that adds domain name
> matching support to rebound(8). The patch is quite rough at the
> moment.
>
> The config is as follows:
>
> match "local." 10.0.0.53
> match "." 8.8.8.8
So this is taking
Hi everyone,
I've put together a patch for 6.0-stable that adds domain name
matching support to rebound(8). The patch is quite rough at the
moment.
The config is as follows:
match "local." 10.0.0.53
match "." 8.8.8.8
Requests to foo.local. are sent over to 10.0.0.53, all other
