[Dnsmasq-discuss] Very accurate bandwidth tracking...

Simon Kelley simon at thekelleys.org.uk
Tue May 10 12:10:43 BST 2011


Jan Seiffert wrote:
> 2011/5/10 Ed W <lists at wildgooses.com>:
>> Slightly related - I see that --all-servers might have become the default now?
>>        http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2010q2/003942.html
>>
>> Is there some way to disable this and use "known to be up"? The reason is that
>> I'm seeing a large ICMP "unreachable" response generated for the slower response,
>> plus the additional bandwith, eg tcpdump for a request for www.yahoo.co.uk:
>>
> [snip - tcpdump chatter]
> 
> If 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 are your upstream servers, then what you see is
> not all-servers. It's dnsmasqs devious plan to take world domination
> No.. ;)
> Every few query dnsmasq asks all upstream server to measure which is
> faster/more reliable.
> This is not unimportant, also to minimize traffic (banging on an
> unresponsive server is wasting traffic).
> You can see it from the dump. For the first query (AAAA) dnsmasq asks
> both, 8.8.4.4 answers first, the second query for A is only send to
> 8.8.4.4.
> 
> You probably want to play with your firewall to suppress those port
> unreachable, at least in this special case the upstream DNS server
> gives a **** about your port status.
> 
> [snip]
>> Note, if there is no explicit option for this then I think "strict-order" is actually satisfactory as a workaround!
>>
> 
> But in case of upstream failure "strict-order" can screw things up, as
> far as i remember, because then dnsmasq will stick to the strict order
> and keep sending traffic to an unresponsive upstream.

Jan's answer is completely correct. The only thing to add is that the
changes in 2.53 don't make --all-servers the default, they change the
behaviour when there is more than one server for a particular domain:

--server=/example.net/1.2.3.4
--server=/example.net/2.3.4.5

to do the equivalent of --all-servers _for_queries_to_that_domain.

The behaviour for general (not domain-specific) upstream servers is
unchanged.


Cheers,

Simon.



More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list