Comment 14 for bug 1003842

Revision history for this message
Simon Kelley (simon-thekelleys) wrote : Re: Precise NM with "dns=dnsmasq" breaks systems with non-equivalent upstream nameservers

> To be frank, when changing the default system resolver, expected
> behavior should be the default. It's all well and good saying that
> non-equivalent resolvers are 'bad' - and in the case of dnsmasq, that
> might be true - but that's a value judgement that shouldn't have a place
> in this scenario, since users haven't made the choice to enable dnsmasq,
> and so shouldn't have to be aware of the caveats (ie - "My DNS worked
> fine before upgrade").

It's a delicate trade-off, made all the more ironic by the fact that without dnsmasq, a second DNS server is practically useless (because you have to wait for the time-out on the first for each and every query). The easiest solution is just to delete the second nameserver.

All I can say is that dnsmasq provides both modes, and the default is what it is for the reasons I outlined. If Ubuntu as a distro wants to flip the default, they can. My personal opinion is that it would be a mistake, but that's just my opinion.

Question: does networkmanager's GUI expose the option to divert particular domains to a special nameserver? That's an alternative correct way to achieve layering local names over the global DNS.

Cheers,

Simon.