[Dnsmasq-discuss] Query on "strict-order"
Gomathi Shankar P S
gomathishankar37 at gmail.com
Thu Feb 23 13:58:13 UTC 2023
Hi Simon,
Thanks for the response.
We have updated resolv.dnsmasq file with couple of false nameservers (just
to experiment) at the top. With pinging *google.com <http://google.com>*,
we could observe that the dnsmasq (with *strict-order*) is reaching out to
first nameserver and then to next nameserver and it gives up as both
nameservers failed to respond.
With the immediate ping again, dnsmasq reached to third nameserver this
time which resolved *google.com <http://google.com>*.
We have tested the same with *dnsmasq* *v2.86* and we could see the same
behavior.
Could you please confirm that dnsmasq (with *strict-order*) reaches out
only to the top two nameservers one by one and gives up if both fail to
respond? We are expecting dnsmasq to reach all the nameservers one by one
until it gets the response.
I agree that having unreliable upstream servers are not recommended but
sometimes our nameservers fail to respond due to other issues.
Thanks
Gomathi Shankar P S
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/attachments/20230223/8424d4e2/attachment.htm>
More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss
mailing list