Grant Edwards schreef op 2022-10-18 15:50:
On 2022-10-18, William Edwards <wedwa...@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.
That's why .local is a reserved TLD.
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"?
Anywhere in userland.
Would a search domain work for you?
I don't know what you mean by "a search domain".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_domain
--
Grant
_______________________________________________
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
--
With kind regards,
William Edwards
_______________________________________________
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
