Earlier there was some dispute about what the RFCs say about multiple
nameservers.
I found the following RFC which does have something to say about these
issues.
http://www.zoneedit.com/doc/rfc/rfc2182.txt
Here are a couple of passages...
Request for Comments: 2182
Category: Best Current Practice
Selection and Operation of Secondary DNS Servers
Abstract
The Domain Name System requires that multiple servers exist for every
delegated domain (zone). This document discusses the selection of
secondary servers for DNS zones. Both the physical and topological
location of each server are material considerations when selecting
secondary servers. The number of servers appropriate for a zone is
also discussed, and some general secondary server maintenance issues
considered.
[...]
With multiple servers, usually one server will be the primary server,
and others will be secondary servers. Note that while some unusual
configurations use multiple primary servers, that can result in data
inconsistencies, and is not advisable.
The distinction between primary and secondary servers is relevant
only to the servers for the zone concerned, to the rest of the DNS
there are simply multiple servers. All are treated equally at first
instance, even by the parent server that delegates the zone.
Resolvers often measure the performance of the various servers,
choose the "best", for some definition of best, and prefer that one
for most queries. That is automatic, and not considered here.
[...]
--
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
