[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: BIND will completely drop D-BUS dynamic forwarders table support



On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 07:25 -0600, Jima wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2007, Callum Lerwick wrote:
> > This is *exactly* what dnsmasq is designed for. From what I can tell, 
> > the author added dbus support to dnsmasq *specifically* so 
> > NetworkManager could use it. I'm not sure what's up with the disconnect 
> > here. :)
> 
>   Maybe not NM specifically, but certainly conceptually:
> 
> "Added method support for DBus (http://www.freedesktop.org/Software/dbus)
> This is a superior way to re-configure dnsmasq on-the-fly with different 
> upstream nameservers, as the host moves between networks. DBus support 
> must be enabled in src/config.h and should be considered experimental at 
> this point. See DBus-interface for the specification of the DBus method 
> calls supported."

http://osdir.com/ml/network.networkmanager.devel/2005-04/msg00023.html
http://osdir.com/ml/network.networkmanager.devel/2005-05/msg00012.html
http://osdir.com/ml/network.networkmanager.devel/2005-04/msg00036.html

The dnsmasq author was very eager to have dnsmasq used by NM back in
2005. I haven't found any explanation as to why it didn't happen.

Here's a nice fresh thread, it even links back to this one:

http://www.nabble.com/nm-with-dnsmasq--t4940689.html

They seem really dead set on sticking with bind. Seriously, why?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]