> Simon, your suggestion (call it "#18") differs from the suggestion in #17 in 
> two ways. First, #18 sends the first-received reply back 
> to the client without waiting for the results of comparison with other 
> results whereas #17 does wait. Second, #18 switches to 
> strict-order mode when *any* difference is found, whereas #17 proposed only 
> looking for a particular pattern, that being: a 
> NODATA/NXDOMAIN is received from a nameserver that is not listed first and an 
> earlier-listed nameserver does return an address > within the standard libc 
> timeout period. In #17's defence... in #17 the client only has to wait for a 
> reply in the case of a 
> NODATA/NXDOMAIN from a non-first nameserver; the client does get the desired 
> address from the earlier-listed nameserver if 
> there is one --- even the first time; and dnsmasq only drops into 
> strict-order mode under the circumstances when it is necessary for > it to do 
> so such that clients get needed addresses. There is no point, for example, in 
> dropping into strict-order mode if it's the first > nameserver returning 
> NXDOMAIN and a later-listed nameserver returning an address!

> What do you think about the possibility of implementing such ideas?


I think that both are implementable. I worry that #17 will make (real) 
NXDOMAIN/NODATA replies much slower, since there at least two round-trips, and 
possibly a timeout, if a server never replies.

Cheers,
Simon.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842

Title:
  Precise NM with "dns=dnsmasq" breaks systems with non-equivalent
  upstream nameservers

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/1003842/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to