On Sat, Jun 4 2022 at 12:09:00 PM +0200, Peter Boy <pboy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
And split DNS is especially necessary when a server does host
libvirt/KVM VMs. In order to address its VMs (e.g. monitoring tools
or forwarding services) the host must query the libvirt dnsmasq
instance. This is broken since F34/F35 with systemd-resolved. The
only reliable way i know of is a second dnsmasq instance, most easily
as NM plugin.
Does running dnsmasq alongside systemd-resolved have many advantages
over just switching to dnsmasq altogether? I would consider that
instead.
Wouldn’t be systemd-resolvd in enabled or disabled state a valid
indicator what a sysadmin want’s to use and whether to replace a
resolv.conf file by a symbolic link or vice versa?
It's actually the opposite: how you have configured /etc/resolv.conf
tells NetworkManager how you want to manage DNS, if you have no manual
NetworkManager configuration specified. But you can edit NetworkManager
configuration to choose whatever behavior you want. You want
dns=dnsmasq:
https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/NetworkManager/DNS
Michael
_______________________________________________
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
