[Dnsmasq-discuss] Struggling with multiple nameservers

Geert Stappers stappers at stappers.nl
Wed Jan 1 16:30:05 GMT 2020

On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 03:36:33PM +0000, Harry Moyes wrote:
> I have a Raspberry Pi configured with two dummy interfaces in addition to
> the default Ethernet interface.
> I have a workable configuration on the pi with unbound and NSD on the two
> virtual interfaces, and dnsmasq on the Ethernet and loopback interfaces.
> Workable that is with this package loaded. (present default raspbian default
> install)
> dnsmasq/stable,now2.76-5+rpt1+deb9u1 all[installed] dnsmasq-
> base/stable,now2.76-5+rpt1+deb9u1 armhf [installed,automatic]
> and this config fragment:
Why only a fragment?

> bind-interfaces
> listen-address=
} listen-address=
} server=
> no-dhcp-interface=eth0
> no-dhcp-interface=dummy0
> no-dhcp-interface=dummy1
> This setup is fully functional and does all I ask.
> **However**
> I'm actually trying to run pihole-FTL on the Pi, rather than dnsmasq
> directly, which I'm told, includes a locally derived version of dnsmasq 2.8.

Hopefully is 2.8 a typo.  Because dnsmasq is meanwhile at version 2.80

> That derivative version appears to ignore the bind-interfaces directive, and
> thus fails to bind the name server ports, even though the specified
> interfaces are free.

That seems to be the problem. But I fail to see what the problem is.
Most likely due incomplete information on the desired configuration.

> The developers of that derivative are convinced that functionally their
> derivative imports 2.8 in its entirety,simply adds additional monitoring
> hooks.
> I'm obviously not expecting assistance with the pihole-FTP but I'd really
> appreciate any hints of changes intentional or otherwise, that may affect
> the behaviour of "mainline" dnsmasq with respect its behaviour binding the
> wildcard interface, that may have taken place between 2.76 and 2.8 to try to
> understand where the change in behaviour comes from.
> I'm pretty much convinced I need to build and test a mainline version of
> dnsmasq 2.8 from source, to localise where the issue is coming from,
> but I thought I'd respectfully ask here in case someone here can point me in
> the right direction.

Please be aware that your right direction hasn't to be my right direction.

Advice: Make a follow-up posting which describes the wanted
configuration, plus working and NON-working parts.

Geert Stappers
Leven en laten leven

More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list