I know of no disadvantages. This is the setup I recommend.
pdns-recursor might become 'stock' at some point if there are no
objections. As Dan has pointed out, QMT doesn't actually need an onboard
resolver, but it does need to use a resolver that works reliably. I
think this is the simplest
Eric, et. al.:
My feelings about PDNS are that:
- PDNS is as good a resolver as there is, but as a project we
shouldn't play favorites
- PDNS would make an excellent OPTIONAL package -- but shouldn't
necessarily be a pdns-toaster package... I would prefer that we just
tell people how to
I'm not suggesting a QMT-specific package. (What would be the point?)
Most of a 'stock' QMT includes packages that aren't *-toaster specific.
I don't think it should necessarily be a requirement either. Choice is
good. As Dan has pointed out, QMT doesn't *require* an onboard resolver.
None
On 8/26/2013 3:52 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I'm not suggesting a QMT-specific package. (What would be the point?)
Most of a 'stock' QMT includes packages that aren't *-toaster specific.
I don't think it should necessarily be a requirement either. Choice is
good. As Dan has pointed out, QMT
On 08/26/2013 02:15 PM, Dan McAllister wrote:
On 8/26/2013 3:52 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I'm not suggesting a QMT-specific package. (What would be the point?)
Most of a 'stock' QMT includes packages that aren't *-toaster specific.
I don't think it should necessarily be a requirement either.
On 08/16/2013 02:16 AM, Peter Peltonen wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Linux li...@ikf.co.in
mailto:li...@ikf.co.in wrote:
Dear All,
__ __
I received this error several times, please somebody give me a
solution.
__ __
__ __
x...@x.com
