On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:10 AM, Simon Kelley wrote: > Peet McKinney wrote: >> All, >> >> dnsmasq has been an absolute life-saver in my environment. OS X >> Directory services isn't playing nicely with GC discovery in my >> Active Directory environment, so I've brought up a couple instances >> of dnsmasq to help force it into being a good citizen. >> >> I've compiled dnsmasq on 10.6.4 from the 2.55 source and configured >> it to respond correctly to my SRV lookups. I've also installed the >> launchd plist. (Though I have to wonder the value of having that >> plist configured with '--log-queries' and >> '--log-facility=/var/log/dnsmasq.log' by default. Admittedly, I'm an >> idiot for not checking and ending up with a 24GB dnsmasq.log, but >> considering there's not a default rotation for the log it seems a bit >> of an odd choice for a default launchd setup.) > > I can't see the point of that either: I'll certainly remove > '--log-queries'. Is it OK on MacOS X to remove the log-facility line > too, and log through the syslogd?
It seemed to be logging fine to system.log without the log-facility line. This appears in my system.log after remove the 'log-faciltity' line and restarting dnsmasq ... Nov 23 08:21:42 jod dnsmasq[75494]: ignoring nameserver 10.8.197.110 - local interface >> >> Since cleaning up my silly logging issues, I'm left with what my >> simply be a standard behavior of dnsmasq, but one that I'd really >> like to find a way around. When I query SRV records that are in my >> dnsmasq config, they are *always* returned in the same order with no >> randomization. Please see below: >> > > As others have said, it ain't random, the order gets rotated each time. > That would seem to be a sensible thing to do; it's already done for A > records, but the code in the cache subsystem that does that is not in > the path used when answering SRV queries. Honestly, I'm glad to hear it's not random. Goes to show you how closely I looked at the results, but > >> Is there anyway to randomize the answers dnsmasq provides. > > It's half a dozen lines of scary linked-list manipulation, could you try > > http://www.thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/test-releases/dnsmasq-2.56test16.tar.gz > > and see if behaves sensibly? Um wow. No, really *wow*. Thanks for giving this a go. I'll drop this on my secondary server and try right now. Thanks.Peet > Cheers, > > Simon. > > > > >> >> Thanks.Peet >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss >> mailing list [email protected] >> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss >> >
