[Dnsmasq-discuss] host resolved local and remote records too

[Simon Kelley]

On 18/01/13 17:12, Papp Tamas wrote:
> On 01/18/2013 05:15 PM, Simon Kelley wrote:
>>
>> There is a documented limitation of dnsmasq that it doesn't support
>> CNAMES where the target of the
>> CNAME is not known by dnsmasq. Is that what's causing the problem?
>
> I expect, that dnsmasq even doesn't meet with the CNAME.
>
> I think the normal behaviour would be that if it's able to resolve the
> hostname locally, then it stops following the chain to the uptream dns
> server.
>
That is the behaviour, I'm not sure what you're seeing that's different?


Cheers,

SImon.