Thomas, that was a very good summary at comment #33! > Why do you need the dnsmasq package at all? You want NM and dnsmasq. Why not just use the NM-enslaved dnsmasq?
The NM-enslaved dnsmasq uses hardcoded options (in C) that provide extremely limited functionality. * It doesn't listen on ethX (--listen-address=127.0.0.1). So we can't use our servers as DNS servers for our local network PCs, i.e. it's completely useless for LANs. * It doesn't cache requests (--cache-size=0). No caching ==> no DNS queries speedup. This again is very significant for LANs as there are many concurrent users. * Finally, we also need the DHCP and TFTP functionality of dnsmasq, so even if NM+dnsmasq included a real DNS server, we'd have to run another dnsmasq instance (without a DNS service in that case) for its 2 other services. > a good solution would be to put the NM-dnsmasq integration stuff into a package and make this conflict with the standalone dnsmasq package. I completely agree, and to also conflict with bind9 and any other DNS server packages. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/959037 Title: Local resolver prohibits DNS servers from running To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/+bug/959037/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
