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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> 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? randy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040223073717.427B543D1D>