<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Two related questions:<br>
<br>
<br>
1. Support non-error host(1) queries to AAAA and MX records?<br>
<br>
Cmdline-session details, with private info (hopefully) redacted:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://gist.githubusercontent.com/johnnyutahh/0f171e47e6ed861f66a1835150a11e4a/raw">https://gist.githubusercontent.com/johnnyutahh/0f171e47e6ed861f66a1835150a11e4a/raw</a><br>
<br>
Short version:<br>
<br>
a. host(1) against my dnsmasq server == 5(REFUSED)<br>
b. host(1) against Cloudflare/GoDaddy == no error<br>
<br>
Details:<br>
<br>
Ubuntu 20.04's host(1) by default appears to (I think?) query all 3
of of A, AAAA, and MX records. In my simple,
dnsmasq-served-by-only-the-A-record-is-in-/etc/hosts-config, host(1)
complains about the AAAA and MX looks. When asking Cloudflare (with
GoDaddy as source/authoritative server), host(1) does not complain.<br>
<br>
How can I make my dnsmasq server mimic the Cloudflare/GoDaddy
response and make host(1) happy? (I'd like my users to not complain
after a switchover.)<br>
<br>
Does Cloudflare/GoDaddy answer with a blank/empty-string AAAA and MX
record, while dnsmasq simply respond with a "not here"/5(REFUSED)
response?<br>
<br>
What is better/best-practice behavior and why?<br>
<br>
<br>
2. Make dnsmasq, sans upstream DNS, the authoritative DNS for my
domains?<br>
<br>
The host(1) output from dnsmasq's server shows the reply as
non-authoritative, if I'm reading its output correctly.<br>
<br>
Why would dnsmasq not, by default, claim it's the authoritative
server if (in my case) there's no upstream DNS? And how can I make
it do so?<br>
<br>
~Johnny<br>
-- <br>
<i> </i><br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<i> </i></div>
</body>
</html>