[Dnsmasq-discuss] interface-name records vs localise-queries

[Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant]

Thank you Simon!

Much appreciated.

And your 2.77test1 tar along with the localise fix has just gone into 
LEDE master, things should get a bit more testing there :-)

Cheers,

Kevin

On 02/02/17 16:57, Simon Kelley wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> http://thekelleys.org.uk/gitweb/?p=dnsmasq.git;a=commit;h=d42d4706bbcce3
> b5a40ad778a5a356a997db6b34
>
>
> Have fun.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Simon.
>
>
>
> On 01/02/17 13:41, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 17/01/17 04:05, Eric Luehrsen wrote:
>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>
>>> Reading the man page, I would expect the primary address is
>>> returned (localized) and  it acts just like any /etc/hosts entry.
>>> This would imply that this is a bug or oversight.
>>>
>>> quote: -interface-name=<name>,<interface>[/4|/6] Return a DNS
>>> record associating the name with the __ primary address __ on the
>>> given interface. This flag specifies an A or AAAA record for the
>>> given name in the __ same way as an /etc/hosts line __, except
>>> that the address is not constant, but taken from the given
>>> interface
>>>
>>>
>>> (I don't use router DNS that specifically, so I failed to test
>>> this detail before submitting to LEDE. )
>>>
>>> Eric
>>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> Sorry for the the late reply - I've been distracted by many other
>> things.  Your recent lede/dnsmasq.init changes are absolutely
>> wonderful and really useful.  If it weren't for this 'featurette'
>> of localised queries not working, it would be perfect.
>>
>> I wonder if Simon could be persuaded to look into this ready for
>> 2.77?
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant Wed, 11 Jan 2017 10:24:34 -0800 Hello
>>>> All, Recently LEDE changed the way it allocates names to
>>>> interfaces, now using '-interface-name' rather than putting
>>>> names in /etc/hosts or similar. Unfortunately this new method
>>>> appears incompatible with 'localise-queries' in that all
>>>> interfaces/aliases are included in the reply to 'nslookup
>>>> hostname' and not in a 'preferred local interface' order. Is
>>>> this an oversight/feature/bug? Cheers, Kevin
>>> _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss
>>> mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
>>> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss
>> mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
>> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
>>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYk2TiAAoJEBXN2mrhkTWierAQAJUTwrSa6uRmCWp2cNvxlxWO
> lnkehQhnqq43TVH5kg4waao71nigM7K77PnBIDuujs1gpYE1cgXDNIHbIjaBe28L
> zEYdhp/AKoEb9RAFdBApQFjPz6Io5PEKivtLDTDf/EKpN878GTy0LfumQGL7yvc/
> TrvUX6XFGZVaqI3sih9p5tHchg64jrs9fsSv/wmUZCSeJmAUgM22Ovb38rQkJrmW
> wWKsMfNFSxPuDmvkCzrKp6F+G+sXXoPpwEC41BhLRn60mrY5O6G0ytp8qVsCC6Ax
> 5a/7G/8hBX3bGvDHyHx3yRdXNqdDuyqSvjP1BIeunr+emwVoReNkrEowfY3EE9+b
> 7/dQtfbwJx3auL1oRW5IhwqcWFgQ2GtupZapkpJ9hN4uE5KtI0FGx2JWuh1GRWrR
> OQ8mmvyWr00BVJI3TjPbmmkTwPjNGKydSwWNHXwkdUh1K9ZALyN6ezvxuJx4Ptit
> 2ZMtBqc6+PqHO3FL25fTjMETza4ubP/OwU+9LXdnlNc1/Lk0UDTEN5YwU/yx2bDc
> RV2Hwu2d826EvatiW6SmTikLt2vL9ow+4yFdUJZPWg3X8A9pJe/aroymW09NUP1w
> jlE3fwmdVPNoex3TgNwpwRUfJF/qKkZ68ETo+hT8+sRyLIJ04fs8VUvYOxGcPgK5
> HFI7upWmBSHUdZTlpoOe
> =lPRg
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
> Dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
>