On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 06:28 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > NM shouldn't really care what the caching nameserver implementation is, > anything is fine. It just happens that the current bits talked to named > because patches for dnsmasq didn't materialize out of thin air. Plus > I'd like to rethink how NM interacts with nameservers (ideally, NM waits > for pulls, not pushes stuff out). IMO this is not ideal at all, NM knows when interfaces change, not the other way around, *but* if you mean that NM should broadcast a generic "an interface has changed" event and then wait for DNS daemons to query NM to know what are the specifics, that makes indeed sense. In this case we already have scripts in NM that get called when an interface changes, I guess all we need is to: A) make sure this is done for all interfaces including tun0, virt* vlan*, whatever so that the thing is consistent and we do not need special cases B) each package will make scripts that can tell the appropriate daemon in the appropriate way what happened so that it can fetch data out of NM If tight integration exist in the DNS daemon of course all it can do is just sit and wait for the message to appear on dbus I guess. Simo. -- | Simo S Sorce | | Sr.Soft.Eng. | | Red Hat, Inc | | New York, NY | -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
