a DHCP client that
would overwrite resolv.conf and b) you don't care if the router uses
itself for DNS.
Jima
___
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
x27;t right for you, or b) you could run
a second instance of dnsmasq elsewhere, with DHCP disabled, with the
relevant DNS records. Choose your path wisely. ;-)
Jima
___
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
http:
Or, if you can spare another IP to run the second dnsmasq instance on,
you could just assign that DNS server IP to the photo frame.
Jima
On 2012-11-10 16:47, richardvo...@gmail.com wrote:
You could use iptables to redirect DNS queries from that photo frame to
an alternate dnsmasq
55.255.255.0
dhcp-range=tag:bb,192.168.0.11,192.168.0.20,255.255.255.0
dhcp-range=192.168.0.21,192.168.0.254,255.255.255.0
(You probably don't want to be using 192.168.0.255 as it'd typically
be a broadcast address.)
Add other config, season to taste, etc.
Jima
___
=/0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.ip6.arpa/
...I think, but would also cover unspecified and loopback above.
Don't forget to zero-pad undefined sections of prefixes -- those
bitfields are relevant.
Jima
___
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dn
I can't be bothered to
install yet another blob of software for minimal added functionality.
(There's also the pesky subject of client support, but that's only going
to get better.)
Very happy to hear -- thanks! I'm looking forward to this.
Jima
help anything). I imagine you probably know that,
but your wording was curious.
Jima
(edit: re-sent from subscribed address)
On 12/28/2010 01:06 PM, Jan Seiffert wrote:
> 2010/12/28 Jima :
>> First off, I understand if this notion gets shot down real fast; it's a
>> bit of a corner case (although maybe not so much in coming months).
>>
>> With IPv4 address depletion looming (IANA in the
cker for me.)
I welcome any insights others might have, and I understand that the
best move may very well be to use something designed specifically for
this use case.
Thanks in advance; have a nice day.
Jima
ever be necessary in this era -- where IPv6 deployment needs to be
happening NOW -- but I understand that there's some seriously broken
software out there.)
Jima
IPv6 junkie
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Simon Kelley wrote:
It's looking good. One last change (hopes!) This adds a config option
--min-port=
No --max-port? *ducks*
Will spin up shortly.
Jima
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Simon Kelley wrote:
Is there. This (I hope) fixes the capabilties bug seen by Jean, Olaf and
Jamie.
Testing now on my Fedora setups.
Jima
:1(::1) 56 data bytes
ping: sendmsg: Operation not permitted
^C
That's my theory.
Jima
in a DNS reply?" has come up
here before, and thus far the best answer I've come up with (and others
seemed to vet) for that logistical problem is this:
http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2008q1/001776.html
Does that come anywhere near what you're looking for? :-\
Jima
re there things
that should point at the public IP of the box?
If you don't need that functionality, this *might* work:
alias=1.2.3.4,208.69.34.132
Or maybe (Simon?):
alias=0.0.0.0,208.69.34.132
I think I need to go puke now. ;-)
Jima
specification, // has the special meaning of "unqualified
names only" ie names without any dots in them.'
The downside I'm seeing is that --server doesn't appear to allow multiple
upstream servers, so you could only direct it at one or the other of their
two.
Mind, I haven't been able to figure out if this works the right way. :-|
Jima
.disableIPv6" (just type "ipv6" into the filter box).
Jima
x27;s the (failed) build log, if anyone can make more sense out of it
than I can (which ought not be too difficult):
http://beer.tclug.org/jima/text/dnsmasq-2.41-0.8.2.fc9-build.log
Thanks Simon.
Jima
lts-core/x86_64/dnsmasq-2.41-0.6.rc1.fc9.src.rpm/result/build.log
My build failure when I (successfully) tried to reproduce it on Fedora
infrastructure:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=423530&name=build.log
A diff between the working and non-working glibc-headers packages:
h
ilt for Rawhide, and deployed on my local server. I'll
keep an eye on it and whine if I see anything.
Thanks Simon!
Jima
20,
anyway), but not 'ANY.'
Simon, should an ANY query return the forged A record? I can certainly
see both sides to an argument on the subject.
Jima
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Philippe Faure wrote:
/etc/hosts/
127.0.0.1 localhost
192.68.0.34 fileserver
/etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 192.168.0.34 #self
So...is the 1 missing in /etc/hosts, or just your email? :-)
Jima
ly admit I was glossing over that very
fine point (mainly because I have zero experience with SRV records).
Thanks for keeping me honest. ;-)
Jima
stion before I send this, I now realize I may
have entirely misinterpreted it. Did you mean that you wanted the DNS
response to come from a particular port? If that's the case, then I have
no idea. :-(
Jima
I thought the
hash-function trick was a particularly neat alternative.
Thanks for the explanation. I've always vaguely noticed that happening,
but it never occurred to me that it was a specifically-coded feature.
Jima
;t. Either way, though, there does
appear to be some willingness from NetworkManager upstream to use
dnsmasq[4] (what, like 2 years after you added DBus support for that very
purpose?).
So, yay or nay? I'm not looking for a firm commitment, just a "maybe" or
a "hell no.&q
arrier to entry is pretty easy, and
I'm already maintaining three patches...no huge deal. (Actually, I could
merge it with the enable-dbus one, which already mucks around in
config.h.)
FWIW, I think I'll take this opportunity to push 2.41test20 to Rawhide.
Thanks for the feedback.
Jima
407901
Thanks!
Jima
them to be remedied
moving forward.
Thanks for passing these on.
Thanks for fixing them!
Jima
Very bad thing? Whiny gcc? :-)
Thanks!
Jima
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Lars Noodén wrote:
Thanks Jima and Simon. The new code causes host to respond as expected.
No problem. Just happy to watch the open source model work effectively.
:-)
Part of the problem is that IPv6 is still on my list of things to do.
Hopefully by March, I'
address of apt-cacher.mysubdomain.mydomain.fi in /etc/hosts instead
of dnsmasq.conf. Names in /etc/hosts don't exhibit the bug.
Which is why I've never encountered this bug; I always use /etc/hosts.
:-)
Jima
ug, whether
it just requires IPv6 support to be loaded, or if you actually need a
working IPv6 network (which I have). But, I'm pretty sure that's the root
of the problem.
Jima
zed they had to play nice or their product would
find itself being useless real quickly.
Just a theory...
Jima
some good advance warning, because we're supposed to announce license
changes for our packages, and I'll have to change the tag in the spec.
But, since you're including us in this discussion, I'm not too worried
you'll blindside us with a license change. :-)
Jima
quot;Network Name"?) when you right-click on "My Computer" (or go to Control
Panel -> System), and go to the second or so tab. Can't quite remember
the details. :-)
Jima
der a week).
Thanks!
Jima
nstead go to the internal one. Downside: If you have anything that's
only running on the external host, this approach won't work (or you'll
have to provide that service internally as well).
Take it or leave it. :-)
Jima
Someone just filed a bug/RFE against dnsmasq on the Fedora Bugzilla
server:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246265
IMO, this isn't the kind of thing individual distributions should be
fixing/changing, so I'm passing it upstream. Simon? :-)
Jima
er to map tftp filename requests to
differing actual filenames based on the requestor's IP address.
You can't pass the filename-to-request to the client via DHCP? :-(
Jima
bb.ccc.2#53
dnsmasq[25415]: using nameserver aa.bb.ccc.1#53
dnsmasq[25415]: ignoring nameserver 127.0.0.1 - local interface
My resolv.conf contains (among other things):
nameserver 127.0.0.1
nameserver aa.bb.ccc.1
nameserver aa.bb.ccc.2
dnsmasq is apparently smart enough to not ask itself for information. ;-)
Jima
es.
Thanks Simon!
I second that. :-)
Jima
articularly reliable test
(due to compiler oddities, varied libraries, and whatnot). Besides that,
I'm a bit of a stickler about only running packaged software (even if I
have to package it myself).
Jima
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Simon Kelley wrote:
What do people think? Could you/would you test a RC binary?
Sure, I'd inflict it upon my guinea pigs^W^W users. (No, not my Fedora
users, my other ones.)
Jima
e thing. I should add that to my configuration.
Jima
just curious.)
Jima
.fc5.i386.rpm
Most mirrors have dropped it, as the primary mirror only keeps the last
two (2.37-1 and 2.38-1, at this point).
Jima
/5/i386/dnsmasq-2.37-1.fc5.i386.rpm
Not sure about the underlying problems (I'm not a programmer, honest),
I'm just trying to narrow down where the problem might be.
Jima
Fedora Extras dnsmasq maintainer
MMORTAL)
while (*up && !((*up)->flags & F_IMMORTAL))
up = &((*up)->hash_next);
This is why I leave the programming up to the programmers.
Rolling this update out to Fedora...
Jima
why you'd rather not do
it. I can accept that. It's partly one of those "it's not what you say,
but how you say it" things.
Thanks for addressing my question. :-)
Jima
a 7, and the mirrors should soon pick it up for Fedora Extras 5 and
6. :-)
Jima
1. http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2005q1/000106.html
would
run on a current Linux distribution.
Do you think that Dnsmasq can do that without problems?
I think you pretty much just described my office's network (which is,
yes, served by dnsmasq). :-)
Jima
ing it might be some combination of these:
domain-needed
local=/my-domain/
expand-hosts
domain=my-domain
Then I've got a line in /etc/hosts with:
10.0.0.2server my-domain
$ host my-domain
my-domain has address 10.0.0.2
Let me know whether this helps or not.
Jima
192.168.0.42somename foo-domain
Jima
e for local caching, it's not designed
for serving up lots of authoritative DNS (at least, not that I've seen
:-).
Thanks to Simon for the great work, by the way.
Jima
. Might speed things up a little
to begin with.
Jima
et us know if that doesn't fix things up. :)
Jima
57 matches
Mail list logo
