Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
So by default, the algorithm dnsmasq uses for DNS lookups is
 a) Different from that use by GLibC
 b) Wrong

Thus I think we should always use --strict-order when running dnsmasq. The
attached patch adds this

The patch is fine, but I don't understand why you think the dnsmasq algorithm is any less right than the glibc/resolver one.

Rich.

--
Emerging Technologies, Red Hat  http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/
64 Baker Street, London, W1U 7DF     Mobile: +44 7866 314 421

Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod
Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom.
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Charlie Peters (USA) and David
Owens (Ireland)

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list

Reply via email to