On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 08:39:01PM -, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
[...]
...I'm now
trying to convince all package maintainers to use the --local-service
option by default.
AIUI, you've effectively convinced Ubuntu, by virtue of
Curiosity fueled a couple of tests on this. In checking 2 common
scenarios, at least one use case confirms.
Aside from this confirmation, a bigger-picture question could be: in
principle, how is 53 being open and interactive by default any different
than 80, 22, or 137-139 being open and
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 03:02:44PM -, Ryan Beisner wrote:
Aside from this confirmation, a bigger-picture question could be: in
principle, how is 53 being open and interactive by default any different
than 80, 22, or 137-139 being open and interactive by default, when
dnsmasq is not
Yep, I'm with ya Robie.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1306646
Title:
dnsmasq provides recursive answers to the Internet by default
To manage notifications about
I completely agree that it is difficult and hard to draw the line. My
initial approach was to convince the author to change the default
behaviour, but unfortunately I did not succeed with that.
Serving DNS requests to only the intended audience is a better
alternative. This has been the intended
I think you're right, and I think that is indeed the place to do it.
I've seen other people, on similar topics, debate 'the line.' This very
discussion will be valuable in this change because it shows that we are
assessing that aspect. Thanks again for filing this.
--
You received this bug
** Changed in: dnsmasq (Debian)
Status: Unknown = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1306646
Title:
dnsmasq provides recursive answers to the
