[Dnsmasq-discuss] behaviour with non-recursive servers

Simon Kelley simon at thekelleys.org.uk
Wed Feb 21 22:08:06 GMT 2007


Peter Warasin wrote:
> hi
> 
> In some circumstances i have very strange behaviour if there are
> non-recursive upstream domain servers in the game. (for example if a
> second uplink will be enabled if the main uplink fails)
> 
> If a non-recursive upstream dns is in the list of upstream nameservers
> and is used, dnsmasq does not acknowledge it as "faulty" nameserver and
> uses the next one in the list, but returns domain not found, which then
> breaks things if one has a misconfigured system.
> 
> I am wondering why this is implemented this way. Is this only to let the
> user know about the misconfiguration, or is there another cause? I have
> seen that this has been changed back in 2005.

The rationale is that there are some installations which want to forward 
to non-recursive nameservers (for instance, forwarding just queries for 
a particular domain to the authoritative servers for that domain.) It's 
not therefore possible to treat this as an error in all cases.

Since it's a frequent mis-configuration, a warning is logged, but the 
situation may be quite OK, so doing anything else is, in general, not 
possible.

> It is safe to patch process_reply() in order to make it cause an error
> on non-recursive upstream nameservers? What you think?
> 
For a particular installation - yes, but it's probably easier to just 
remove the non-recursive nameservers from the list.

> thank you for a great product!

Glad you like it.


Cheers,

Simon.

> 
> peter
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
> Dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss




More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list