[Dnsmasq-discuss] Unable to connect by hostname for local machines

[dnsmasq at ailsby.net]

On 12-10-22 10:32 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 09:24:34PM -0600, dnsmasq at ailsby.net wrote:
>> I am trying to setup dnsmasq so that I can use the OpenDNS servers
>> for my younger children, and then have all other devices use a
>> different dns server (Google's).
>>
>> The program that I am having is that I cannot use the hostname of
>> any of my local devices to connect, I can only do it via the ip
> Neither Google nor OpenDNS knows the names and addresses of your
> internal hosts. If you are setting your machines to use these
> external nameservers, you're not using the DNS feature of dnsmasq.
>
>> address. This happens with my ubuntu server, and osx machines.  My
>> windows laptop does not have an issue, and can ping other devices
>> by hostname.
>>
>> As far as I can tell, all else is working properly.  The devices
>> that are supposed to use OpenDNS are, and the ones that should use
>> google's dns are.
>>
>> My setup:
>> * tomatousb on my router
>> * dnsmasq is version 2.61
>> * static dns set to the OpenDNS ips
>> * static ips assigned to the machines I want to use the google dns servers
>> * dynamic ips assigned to the machines to use the OpenDNS servers.
>> Set to the range of 192.168.1.100 to 192.168.1.199
> A style suggestion: I would use CIDR-style ranges rather than
> decimal-style. For example, 192.168.1.128-196 can be addressed in a
> single CIDR expression, 192.168.1.128/26.
>
>> Options set for dnsmasq:
>> # Range of IPs that are set up as static (computers that should
>> have unrestricted DNS)
>>
>> dhcp-range=set:green,192.168.1.10,192.168.1.99
>>
>> dhcp-option=net:green, 3, 192.168.1.1 #Assigns "green" gateway to
>> these clients
>> dhcp-option=net:green, 6, 8.8.8.8 #Assigns "green'" DNS server to
>> these clients (google).
>>
>> Any ideas on what I need to do so that the devices in the ip range
>> 192.168.1.10 to 192.168.1.99 can use hostnames to connect to each
>> other?  Is there any other information that is needed to understand
>> this issue?
> Probably what you want to do is to use a different upstream server
> for the big people and little people machines. And I know of no
> trivial way to do that in a single instance of dnsmasq. It might
> require two instances (one of them being DNS-only.) And I'm not sure
> that would be easy, either.
>
> This could be done with BIND named using views (and there too, you
> would benefit from the above CIDR suggestion.) But then you wouldn't
> have the ease of setup of dynamic DNS that dnsmasq offers.
Thanks for the clear response.  I will have to see if there is some 
other way to get to my desired end point.