Thanks, that is exactly the message I wanted to tell.
Perhaps I should keep corner cases to myself until someone actually hits
them. It has clearly confused people and created unnecessary reactions.
Conflict will arise only when configuration change done by administrator
were not complete.
Please, Stephen, would you please read what I wrote, not what Kevin
wrongly deducted?
The change I made in dnsmasq does not conflict with systemd-resolved in
default configuration or if configured correctly. I have wrote scenario,
when it can conflict and how to fix it. So no, there is no
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 05:31:36PM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Petr Menšík wrote:
> > Anyway, dnsmasq will listen by default on 127.0.0.1, as every standard
> > resolver does. You can use listen-address=127.0.0.53 if you like, but
> > then it will conflict with systemd-resolved.
>
>
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 11:32 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
>
> Petr Menšík wrote:
> > systemd-resolved is unfortunately known to broken.
> [snip]
> > Dnsmasq does not break DNSSEC, systemd-resolved does.
> [snip]
> > Unfortunately broken are clients having systemd-resolved enabled.
>
> How
Petr Menšík wrote:
> systemd-resolved is unfortunately known to broken.
[snip]
> Dnsmasq does not break DNSSEC, systemd-resolved does.
[snip]
> Unfortunately broken are clients having systemd-resolved enabled.
How exactly is it broken? If you refer to:
systemd-resolved is unfortunately known to broken. I would recommend
having systemd-resolved forwarded to dnsmasq, which can then be
forwarded further.
Dnsmasq does not break DNSSEC, systemd-resolved does. But this change
should create conflict with systemd-resolved only in case it was
Petr Menšík wrote:
> That might create a regression in special case. If you are running by
> default systemd-resolved, it listens already on domain port on address
> 127.0.0.53 address. But if bind-interfaces or bind-dynamic is not used
> explicitly, dnsmasq will try to listen on wildcard address
Hello!
I have just pushed a change, which modifies default configuration of
dnsmasq package. I think it should not create any regressions, but it
may happen in few special cases.
What has changed:
It is described in bug #2258062 [1]. It no longer contains in default
configuration
