[Dnsmasq-discuss] host resolved local and remote records too

[Papp Tamas]

On 01/20/2013 06:12 PM, Simon Kelley wrote:
>
> On 18/01/13 17:12, Papp Tamas wrote:
>> On 01/18/2013 05:15 PM, Simon Kelley wrote:
>>>
>>> There is a documented limitation of dnsmasq that it doesn't support
>>> CNAMES where the target of the
>>> CNAME is not known by dnsmasq. Is that what's causing the problem?
>>
>> I expect, that dnsmasq even doesn't meet with the CNAME.
>>
>> I think the normal behaviour would be that if it's able to resolve the
>> hostname locally, then it stops following the chain to the uptream dns
>> server.
>>
> That is the behaviour, I'm not sure what you're seeing that's different?

If there is a CNAME record on the upstream (internet) dns server and if I put the hostname to the 
hosts file, the CNAME record is still provided by dnsmasq among the A record.

So dnsmasq answers two records:

- one A record (from the hosts file, this is the masked IP address)
- one CNAME record (from the real dns zone on internet)


See my example in the first email.

tamas