[Dnsmasq-discuss] mixing synth-domain and auth-domain does not appear to work for me.

[David Beveridge]

On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 6:38 AM, Simon Kelley <simon at thekelleys.org.uk> wrote:
> On 02/04/14 21:24, Simon Kelley wrote:
>
>>
>> This is, I think, just an oversight. synth-domain certainly generates
>> "Locally defined DNS records" which is what the auth-zone is specified
>> to contain.
>>
>
> Actually, there is a reason. It doesn't in general make sense to include
> the records created by synth-domain in a zone transfer, since there are
> likely to be a lot of them. They could be included in answers for the
> auth-zone, at the expense of the additional complication that the zone
> answered by dnsmasq becomes no longer exactly the zone that's transfered
> to a secondary (since the synth-domain answers can't be included in the
> transfer).
>

I agree, you definitely would not want to zone transfer the entire synth zone
just the records from the auth zone.  Actually, once you introduce synth
records to a zone, transferring it is not practical at all.

I think I have misunderstood what auth-zone does.
It seems it is not required in this situation.

I just tested and discovered that:- If I remove the auth-zone statement from
the config file the synth-zone will still serve records it finds in /etc/hosts.
In this way I can still have a mixed zone with manually created records and
synthesized records in the same zone.

The synth-domain kind of implies that the zone is authorative,
so no need for the auth-zone statement as well.

dave