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

Re: NetworkManager vs Cacheing nameserver

On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 15:24 +0000, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: 
> On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 09:54 -0500, Tom Horsley wrote: 
> > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:30:02 +0000
> > Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > 
> > > That seems to be working for the moment, but there's an element of magic
> > > in it that makes me nervous. The default named.conf file is set up as a
> > > simple cacheing nameserver for local queries, but where does named do
> > > its recursive lookups if not from the DHCP service?
> > 
> > If you want to add the name servers specified by DHCP to lookups,
> > then you don't want your resolv.conf file to be unmodified,
> > instead you want NM to modify it "correctly", like by
> > leaving as one nameserver and adding additional
> > nameservers. <sarcasm> How to get NM to do this is no doubt described
> > fully in the extensive NetworkManager documentation. </sarcasm>
> Quite.
> > With bind configured as a cacheing server, there is usually
> > a "forwarders" section in named.conf that points to the DNS
> > servers it should look at.
> There isn't. This is the default, unmodified named.conf.
> I've now rebooted to check, and /etc/resolv.conf has again been
> overwritten by NM, despite the PEERDNS=no line in the ifcfg file, i.e.
> it has reverted to what it was. NM seems to be calling dhclient with its
> own private config file, the whereabouts of which are non-obvious.

You might want to take this question to the NetworkManager list at
gnome.org.  The developers hang out there--if it's a bug, they'd
probably like to know about it.  If it's by design, they can probably
explain it.

> poc

                Matthew Saltzman

Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu

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