Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:37:12 +0800 From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> To: "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Testers wanted: reentrant resolver Message-ID: <20040223073717.427B543D1D@mx1.FreeBSD.org> References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10402201927260.12256-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> <200402210048.i1L0mVGW014390@green.homeunix.org> <20040221021045.GB8042@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20040222231007.BFEEB43D1F@mx1.FreeBSD.org> <20040222195058.K6123@sasami.jurai.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
>> what i don't understand is why gal/moz has its own resolver. >> for those of us who roam, it seems to mean having to restart >> the browser and lose all our windows/tabs, a major pita. >> >> [ and due to sick natted sites which block 53, one can >> not just have one's laptop's resolv.conf have 127.0.0.1 >> up front and run named ] > > Set your local nameserver to forward only, and make > dhclient generate a file with a forwarders entry that you > can pre-process into a named.conf. and stand on your left foot while holding your nose. why is there a need to replicate dns caching, especially if it casuses folk to think of kinky cruft such as you suggest? where is the win? randyhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040223073717.427B543D1D>