On Sat, Apr 10, 2021, 02:02 Mantas Mikulėnas <graw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021, 22:28 Phillip Susi <ph...@thesusis.net> wrote: > >> >> Silvio Knizek writes: >> >> > So in fact your network is not standard conform. You have to define >> > .local as search and routing domain in the configuration of sd- >> > resolved. >> >> Interesting... so what are you supposed to name your local, private >> domains? > > > .home.arpa is reserved for that purpose by IANA (as part of the Homenet > work, but explicitly stated that its usage is not limited to Homenet > protocols). > Er, I think I mixed up IANA and IETF there. It should be the latter, I think. > Though if you own a public domain there's nothing wrong with using a > subdomain of it for your private LAN, either. > > I believe Microsoft used to ( or still do? ) recommend using >> .local to name your domain if you don't have a public domain name, so >> surely I'm not the first person to run into this? > > > It could be that at some point they did. I've seen Active Directory > domains named "university.local" (even though they *did* have a public > domain...) But IIRC they went back on that recommendation. > > Why does >> systemd-resolved not fall back to DNS if it can't first resolve the name >> using mDNS? That appears to be allowed by the RFC. >> > > Simply falling back for each individual query is probably not desirable > because it would also leak local hostnames for people who *do* use mDNS. > > Systemd-resolved could implement the "check if local. SOA exists" probe > that AFAIK Apple does, I think there was a github thread about it... > > ... Actually, if you manually set an interface's search domain in resolved > to "local", doesn't that make it start using DNS for this domain? I cannot > test right now, but I'm *sure* I've seen something like that in resolved's > docs. > >>
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
