Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

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

 



On Tue, 2021-02-23 at 00:02 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Well, this silent fallback behavior is one of the reasons I have
> refused to 
> use systemd-resolved at all so far.
> 
> The issue with the cloud setups would also have been caught much
> earlier if 
> it had failed right away and not silently used an external DNServer. 
> Ignoring broken configuration and just using the default is not
> useful error 
> handling.

I guess having a fallback is a double-edged sword. On one hand, indeed,
this issue with broken cloud-init would have been caught earlier, but
on the other hand, some people couldn't care less which DNS servers are
being used if things "just work".

> 
> And the real issue is that systemd-resolved has broken cloud-init, so
> cloud-init needs to be fixed/updated.

Yes, this is the main issue for cloud setups.

However, enabling/disabling a fallback is still an issue on its own. I
wouldn't add much more since I think Lennart summed that up pretty well
in his post.

> It is unfortunate that this behavior has changed in an update.

This is the thing that is probably hurting users the most. They have a
working F33 cloud instance and after systemd is upgraded, the instance
will *probably* (i.e. if users didn't configure DNS themselves and
relied on cloud-init) be heavily broken, i.e. DNS resolution not
working.

I actually think it would still be beneficial to flip this change, i.e.
remove the "-Ddns-servers=" line
(https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemd/blob/f33/f/systemd.spec#_372
), for the next F33 systemd update.

>  This has 
> happened because all the complaints about the old behavior back when
> the 
> Change proposal was discussed (i.e., BEFORE Fedora 33 was released)
> were 
> completely ignored by the Change owners and by FESCo (even though the
> fix 
> was apparently a one-line change that could easily have been made
> before the 
> release).

I didn't follow that so I can't comment on it.



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

_______________________________________________
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[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