It has been a few months since the last comment. If no solution along the lines of those outlined earlier (see comments #28, #29, #34, #37) is forthcoming then nm-dnsmasq should simply be put back into strict-order mode, thus reversing the change made at the suggestion of bug #903854.
Stéphane wrote in #37: > Switching back to strict-order is a bad idea for the reasons > listed in bug 903854, namely, we'd loose our biggest > advantage from using dnsmasq. The biggest advantage is only a performance advantage under some circumstances. This in no way stacks up against outright failure under other circumstances — circumstances typical of many LANs. If no solution for this bug (#1003842) is forthcoming then it is time to admit that switching off strict-order was the wrong thing to do. Knowing what we know now, we should switch it back on, and only switch it off again when a solution has been found for this bug. If switching on strict- order eliminates the only advantages of using nm-dnsmasq then nm-dnsmasq itself should be switched off (as proposed at bug #1086693) until that time. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842 Title: dnsmasq sometimes fails to resolve private names in networks with non- equivalent nameservers To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/+bug/1003842/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
