On 11/17/2010 02:30 PM, Chris G wrote:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 02:04:57PM -0500, Victor Duchovni wrote:
I would expect that dnsmasq is documented, and the documentation should
cover sufficient detail to help you avoid this illegal RRset combination.
You should only bother the "gurus/maintainers" if the documentation
is incomplete or observed behaviour deviates from the documentation.
Yes, of course, OK. But I have a virtually default dnsmasq
installation so I can't glean much from the documentation as I haven't
really configured anything away from default. It's a quiet list! :-)
Pardon my pointing out the obvious, but these sort of teething problems
can be mitigated by utilizing bind views. It's not an uncommon situation
for servers to be natted, and you're not the first person to be caught
off guard by the difference between the local/private IP of a server and
it's public/natted IP. In the old days we used to employ "split dns" -
one set of servers for the outside world, another for internal use - but
since bind v9 was introduced some years ago, the views feature allows a
single server to provide the functionality of split dns. I even use dns
views on my home dns servers.
Just a thought - assuming that usage of dnsmasq etc is not carved in stone.
Joe
