Re: This is bad, was Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: systemd-resolved

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

 



  Hi,

> For example, if I have my laptop in my home wifi, connected to RH VPN,
> then there are some names resolvable only via the local
> DNS. Specifically: my router's, my printer's and my NAS' address. And
> there are other names only resolvable via RH VPN. systemd-resolved for
> the first time gives me a chance for this to just work: it will send
> requests to both the RH DNS servers and the local ones, and uses the
> first successful reply, or the last failed reply. And that's quite
> frankly awesome, because that *never* worked before.

Sorry, but that is not correct.

NetworkManager can handle split-dns just fine, by using dnsmasq and
reconfiguring it via dbus when vpn connections come and go.  I can
easily add more servers + zones by dropping a config file snippet into
the /etc/NetworkManager/dnsmasq.d/ directory, for example to resolve the
hostnames for my kvm guests on the libvirt network.

That works for ages on my RHEL-7 workstation where systemd-resolved
doesn't even exist ...

> So sending the requests to all available DNS servers in absence of
> better routing info is a great enabler:

I fail to see why sending queries to all servers is a good plan.  The
redhat vpn dns servers surely can't resolve the hostnames for my local
lan, and frankly they shouldn't even know which hosts I try to access.
Likewise my ISP shouldn't know which non-public RH servers I try to
access.

> Key, take-away here:
> 
> 1. Ideally we'd just route company DNS traffic to VPN, and everything
>    else to local LAN DNS. But that requires explicit routing info to
>    be configured, we cannot auto-detect this info (beyond some minor
>    inference from the search domains)

Well, if auto-detect doesn't work we should (a) fix the vpn
protocols/implementations and (b) fallback to manually configuring
things until this is done.

>    VPN use, then sending to everything in parallel and taking the
>    first positive reply and the last negative one is the best chance
>    to make things "just work".

At the expense of leaking information, which I don't consider a good
trade-off.

take care,
  Gerd
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux