Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ncm-resolver: support to allow another local caching server to be used. #1648

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

aka7
Copy link
Contributor

@aka7 aka7 commented Jan 17, 2024

option to turn off use of dnscache which only configures for djbdns.
new option allows resolver to still be used to update resolv.conf but with local dns caching client already configured. so usual test to make sure it works before updating resolv.conf to be local.

Describe the change you are making here, in particular we would like to know:

  • Why the change is necessary.
    use resolver outside of dnscache.
  • What backwards incompatibility it may introduce.
    none

option to turn off use of dnscache which only configures for djbdns.
new option allows resolver to still be used to update resolv.conf
but with local dns caching client already configured.
@aka7 aka7 requested review from jrha and ned21 January 17, 2024 17:07
@aka7
Copy link
Contributor Author

aka7 commented Jan 23, 2024

any of the maintainers are able to review this? I like to know if I need to make any changes before I do a internal release please. or does it look good to you? @jrha does anyone else use dnscache?

@jrha
Copy link
Member

jrha commented Jan 24, 2024

At first glance this looks fine, we don't use dnscache, but do have a number of hosts that have a local resolver and set /system/network/nameserver/0 to 127.0.0.1.

@aka7
Copy link
Contributor Author

aka7 commented Jan 24, 2024

At first glance this looks fine, we don't use dnscache, but do have a number of hosts that have a local resolver and set /system/network/nameserver/0 to 127.0.0.1.

ah, let me try to see if this will work for us, if it does then maybe we won't need this.
we also use actual nameservers in some circumstances to by disabling dnscache. But I think maybe we can make it work in both circumstances.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants