On 04/02/13 15:36, Sergio Callegari wrote: > On 04/02/2013 15:40, Simon Kelley wrote: >> On 03/02/13 07:48, Thomas Hood wrote: >>>> there's still the unresolved question >>>> of whether re-enabling --strict-order >>>> will suffice as a workaround, since >>>> 12.10 relies on DBus to populate the >>>> nameservers. Is there any extra >>>> information on this? >>> Please try it and report back. :-) >>> >>> (Put "strict-order" in a file in /etc/NetworkManager/dnsmasq.d/; stop >>> network-manager; make sure all dnsmasq processes are dead; start >>> network-manager.) >>> >> It doesn't work: It will always use the same server first, but the order >> of servers given to the DBus interface isn't preserved internally, and >> actually changes each time the DBus interface is used. >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Simon. > Isn't it possible to change dnsmasq behavior to query the servers in any > order > or in parallel and in the case the first server to reply says "I don't know" > avoid relying on that information, rather wait and see if in a reasonable > time > some other server answers "I do"?
You're far from the first person to ask that question. The answer is that there is no possible response in the DNS protocol which means "I don't know". NXDOMAIN or NODATA answers _don't_ mean that; they mean "I know that this domain doesn't exist". They also make up quite a large proportion of the DNS results returned to the average host, so that all of those queries would suddenly take much longer. > > With the current behavior, whenever I need to access a captive portal, I > basically have to press the "reload page" button 50 times until for some > reasons > the order in which the nameservers reply becomes the good one. The fundamental problem lies with the captive portal, and no good solution which can be implemented by dnsmasq has so far been devised. Cheers, Simon. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop Packages, which is subscribed to network-manager in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842 Title: dnsmasq sometimes fails to resolve private names in networks with non- equivalent nameservers Status in “dnsmasq” package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in “network-manager” package in Ubuntu: In Progress Status in “dnsmasq” source package in Precise: Confirmed Status in “network-manager” source package in Precise: Triaged Status in “dnsmasq” package in Debian: New Bug description: A number of reports already filed against network-manager seem to reflect this problem, but to make things very clear I am opening a new report. Where appropriate I will mark other reports as duplicates of this one. Consider a pre-Precise system with the following /etc/resolv.conf: nameserver 192.168.0.1 nameserver 8.8.8.8 The first address is the address of a nameserver on the LAN that can resolve both private and public domain names. The second address is the address of a nameserver on the Internet that can resolve only public names. This setup works fine because the GNU resolver always tries the first- listed address first. Now the administrator upgrades to Precise and instead of writing the above to resolv.conf, NetworkManager writes server=192.168.0.1 server=8.8.8.8 to /var/run/nm-dns-dnsmasq.conf and "nameserver 127.0.0.1" to resolv.conf. Resolution of private domain names is now broken because dnsmasq treats the two upstream nameservers as equals and uses the faster one, which could be 8.8.8.8. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/+bug/1003842/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages Post to : desktop-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
