[Dnsmasq-discuss] Dnsmasq only to respond to local queries?
michal at sawicz.net
Sun Oct 5 16:09:51 BST 2008
I got a direct response so I'm forwarding it here and my following
responses are below...
> depends on your setup but for me dnsmasq is authoritative for the
> locally served domain, and forwards all other domains out to the
But it's still dnsmasq that does the reply, or does it tell the hosts
somehow that they should ask the other ns?
> so if hosts 4 and 5 are setup correctly with TWO dns sources of
> information your dnsmasq ip first, and a public internet source
I'm not sure I understand that sentence...
> You said that router2 only had one ip cable interface which to me
> suggests that router1 and router2 are connected to each other via WIFI
> link since the ip cable interface hooks router2 up to the internet.
Yes I didn't explain that part - the WiFi link are two APs separate from
the routers, connected to my networks through standard switches.
So the setup actually looks like this:
------ Internet ------
Router1 --- AP <======> AP --- Router2
/ | \ | \
host1 host2 host3 host4 host5
Where /|\- are ethernet/DSL links, = is WiFi.
> if router2 suddenly has a WIFI problem, then yes hosts 4 and 5 do lose
> all inet capability because the link is broken.
Router1 has its own DSL link, as does router2. The WiFi link should only
be responsible of linking the two LAN segments, not participating in
internet communication at all.
> You'll forgive me, but I dont see the value in the extra work you are
> doing here.
> Seems to me like you have added extra equipment you dont need and made
> your network more complex, but have not solved a problem.
> whats wrong with this:
> router1 w/dnsmasq
> / \
> cabled wifi router2
> hosts ---------------
> repeated \
> wireless hosts
I don't want the second segment to depend on the first one. They have
their separate web connections (which, in turn, I can use as a fallback
for the other one.
> I understand (I think) what problem you were trying to solve with your
> original setup, but I guess I dont think you solved it.
> they arent two seperate subnets that need to talk to each other, so
> since they are the same subnet I would try to wire them that way.
> Feel free to enlighten me if you think I missing something.
Router1 and 2 are on two different physical locations (the WiFi is a
200m bridge). I want the two locations to be independent when it comes
to internet connection, I only want the WiFi to allow fast connections
between the hosts on either side, but still use their
respective connections to the internet.
Thanks for the insight anyway, the basic idea is that I'd like dnsmasq
to say 'dunno, ask the other guy' to queries for remote domains. On the
other hand if that's not possible there's no real problem, it's not like
DNS traffic is a big one and if dnsmasq would be unavailable, the hosts
will ask upstream anyway.
Michal Sawicz <michal at sawicz.net>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Rance Hall" <ranceh at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Dnsmasq only to respond to local queries?
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 11:09:54 -0500
More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss