<div dir="ltr"><div>Thank you for the link for the patch. Do I need to build it from source to include the patch or can I install patch for dnsmasq instance that is installed via apt ( i googled but could not find info on how to apply the patch)</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 4:05 AM <<a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss-request@lists.thekelleys.org.uk">dnsmasq-discuss-request@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Send Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss-request@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">dnsmasq-discuss-request@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss-owner@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">dnsmasq-discuss-owner@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of Dnsmasq-discuss digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: Struggling with multiple nameservers (Geert Stappers)<br>
2. Re: Struggling with multiple nameservers (Geert Stappers)<br>
3. SRV record caching (Abhishek Patti)<br>
4. Re: SRV record caching (Geert Stappers)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:03:44 +0100<br>
From: Geert Stappers <<a href="mailto:stappers@stappers.nl" target="_blank">stappers@stappers.nl</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Struggling with multiple nameservers<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:20200113210344.gxkkjmsrpob2ps7e@gpm.stappers.nl" target="_blank">20200113210344.gxkkjmsrpob2ps7e@gpm.stappers.nl</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<br>
<br>
On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 10:20:40PM +0000, Harry Moyes wrote:<br>
> On 12/01/2020 15:40, Geert Stappers wrote:<br>
> > On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 10:33:43PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:<br>
> > > On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 04:37:32PM +0000, Harry Moyes wrote:<br>
> > > > > ....<br>
> > > > <br>
> > > > I've already mentioned this to the developers.<br>
> > > <br>
> > > Any prove of that?<br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > > > The change is apparently intentional.<br>
> > > Assumed or documented?<br>
> > > <br>
> > <br>
> > My questions from above are indeed terse.<br>
> > <br>
> > Let me elaborate<br>
> > |> > I've already mentioned this to the developers.<br>
> > |><br>
> > |> Any prove of that?<br>
> > <br>
> > That question was written in the hope of getting an URL or email<br>
> > where can be read what was mentioned to the pihole developers.<br>
> > <br>
> > I still hope such email or URL pops up. The idea is to ask,<br>
> > differently as previously, to regain the lost functionality.<br>
> > <br>
> <br>
> Unless it has gone missing somewhere I have already replied to the question.<br>
> <br>
> I misunderstood the response I got from the pihole-FTL developers.<br>
> <br>
> pihole-FTL -v does not respond as dnsmasq does. Intentionally.<br>
> <br>
> However if you submit the request as<br>
> <br>
> pihole-FTL -- -v<br>
> <br>
> you get exactly the same response as from dnsmasq including the compiled<br>
> options.<br>
> <br>
> The subtly of the extra "--" passed me by initially.<br>
> <br>
> As I said in my previous post, if I had understood the reply I got better,<br>
> I'd have saved myself a load of pain.<br>
> <br>
> Other than possibly making that subtlety more obvious to the slower on the<br>
> uptake among us, like me, there is nothing else required here.<br>
<br>
Acknowledge<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
Geert Stappers<br>
-- <br>
Yes, the right question is real challenge<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:22:21 +0100<br>
From: Geert Stappers <<a href="mailto:stappers@stappers.nl" target="_blank">stappers@stappers.nl</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Struggling with multiple nameservers<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:20200113212221.3tsyz5ozdxub4fkg@gpm.stappers.nl" target="_blank">20200113212221.3tsyz5ozdxub4fkg@gpm.stappers.nl</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<br>
<br>
On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 08:48:53PM +0100, Dominik wrote:<br>
> On Sun, 2020-01-12 at 16:40 +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:<br>
> > On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 10:33:43PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:<br>
> > > On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 04:37:32PM +0000, Harry Moyes wrote:<br>
> > > > On 08/01/2020 14:47, <a href="mailto:wkitty42@gmail.com" target="_blank">wkitty42@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br>
> > > > > ...<br>
> > > > <br>
> > > > I've already mentioned this to the developers.<br>
> > > <br>
> > > Any prove of that?<br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > > > The change is apparently intentional.<br>
> > > <br>
> > > Assumed or documented?<br>
> > > <br>
> > <br>
> > My questions from above are indeed terse.<br>
> > <br>
> > Let me elaborate<br>
> > > > > I've already mentioned this to the developers.<br>
> > > > <br>
> > > > Any prove of that?<br>
> > <br>
> > That question was written in the hope of getting an URL or email<br>
> > where can be read what was mentioned to the pihole developers.<br>
> > <br>
> > I still hope such email or URL pops up. The idea is to ask,<br>
> > differently as previously, to regain the lost functionality.<br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> Hey all,<br>
> <br>
> I may speak up as the main developer of Pi-hole's dnsmasq fork. We<br>
> embed dnsmasq into our daemon. The "dnsmasq -v" functionality is not<br>
> "gone", it just moved one step away as dnsmasq is only contained and<br>
> not the main application in our setup.<br>
> <br>
> So this statement is simply not true.<br>
> > The pihole derivative has lost that rather useful feature, so<br>
> exactly what options it has been complied with is hard to tell.<br>
> <br>
> Use<br>
> pihole-FTL -v<br>
> to get the version of our daemon.<br>
> <br>
> Use<br>
> pihole-FTL -- -v<br>
> to get the version of the embedded dnsmasq.<br>
> <br>
> I can already tell you that it will bring up<br>
> > Dnsmasq version pi-hole-2.80 Copyright (c) 2000-2018 Simon Kelley<br>
> > Compile time options: IPv6 GNU-getopt no-DBus no-i18n no-IDN DHCP<br>
> > DHCPv6 no-Lua TFTP no-conntrack ipset auth DNSSEC loop-detect<br>
> > inotify dumpfile<br>
> <br>
> This issue has been extensively discussed here as well:<br>
> <a href="https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/struggling-with-pihole-ftl/26473" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/struggling-with-pihole-ftl/26473</a><br>
> and I have to admit that it's still not clear what was/is the error but<br>
> it looks like a user induced one. Also because the problem just<br>
> "disappeared" after some config changes that, apparently, cannot be<br>
> isolated any more.<br>
<br>
OK<br>
<br>
<br>
> I also already mentioned how to obtain the embedded dnsmasq's version<br>
> here on Jan 1st, 2020:<br>
> <a href="https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/struggling-with-pihole-ftl/26473/39?u=dl6er" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/struggling-with-pihole-ftl/26473/39?u=dl6er</a><br>
> which was one week before the original poster claimed that we removed<br>
> this intentionally ... interesting to see how perspectives can differ.<br>
<br>
Yes, perspectives differ.<br>
It becomes hard when the focal point isn't the same.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
Geert Stappers<br>
-- <br>
Leven en laten leven<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 20:17:00 -0800<br>
From: Abhishek Patti <<a href="mailto:abhishek.patti@gmail.com" target="_blank">abhishek.patti@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
Subject: [Dnsmasq-discuss] SRV record caching<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAH=o+=2au89K2LESLfQriymO7qCU30O-9pwkHFQ4a53BdO=<a href="mailto:Wvw@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">Wvw@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Hi<br>
<br>
I see there is a recent (2019-01) patch enabling SRV record caching in<br>
dnsmasq,. However there seems to be no new version which contains this<br>
feature. I wanted to ask how people are working around this problem of not<br>
having SRV caching ? We are currently having major issues since we use SIP<br>
alot. Any help would be appreciated<br>
<br>
Thank You<br>
Abhishek Patti<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/attachments/20200113/b0097110/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/attachments/20200113/b0097110/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 07:06:24 +0100<br>
From: Geert Stappers <<a href="mailto:stappers@stappers.nl" target="_blank">stappers@stappers.nl</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] SRV record caching<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:20200114060624.fhgpbi7thgfzv4dd@gpm.stappers.nl" target="_blank">20200114060624.fhgpbi7thgfzv4dd@gpm.stappers.nl</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<br>
<br>
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 08:17:00PM -0800, Abhishek Patti wrote:<br>
> Hi<br>
> <br>
> I see there is a recent (2019-01) patch enabling SRV record caching in<br>
> dnsmasq.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2019q1/012777.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2019q1/012777.html</a><br>
<br>
<br>
> However there seems to be no new version which contains this<br>
> feature. I wanted to ask how people are working around this problem of not<br>
> having SRV caching ?<br>
<br>
> We are currently having major issues since we use SIP<br>
> alot. Any help would be appreciated<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of Dnsmasq-discuss Digest, Vol 176, Issue 17<br>
************************************************<br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">abhishek </div></div>