[Dnsmasq-discuss] Is empty domain OK?

[Grant Edwards]

On 2022-10-18, William Edwards <wedwards at cyberfusion.nl> wrote:
> Grant Edwards schreef op 2022-10-18 03:03:
>
>> All of the examples I see for setting up dnsmasq on networks without a
>> "real" domain always say to choose a "fake" local domain (e.g. .lan,
>> .home.arpa, .local, etc.). Then you also configure dnsmask to treat
>> that domain as local so that requests for that domain are never
>> forwarded.
>> 
>> Why?
>> 
>> Are you not allowed to have have an empty domain so that "plain"
>> hostnames are satisfied locall (e.g. from /etc/hosts and the DHCP
>> leases) and only requests with a domain are forwarded to the external
>> server?
>
> DNS supports this.

Yes, I knew that.

> I don't know if dnsmasq does.

That's what I was trying to ask. I guess I wasn't clear enough.

> Regardless of whether it's technically possible: why would you want 
> this?

If there is no domain name for a network, then it seems logical to not
use a domain name for that network. Making up a fake one which might
later conflict with a real, external, domain seems like the wrong way
to go about things.

> This will cause issues. Many hostname validators require the 
> presence of a dot, for example.

That's an interesting point. Where does one run into such "hostname
validators"?

> Would a search domain work for you?

I don't know what you mean by "a search domain".

--
Grant