On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 12:52 -0700, David MacMahon wrote: > Dan Williams wrote: > > Can you file a bug with exactly this information against 'bind' in Red > > Hat bugzilla? This sounds like a caching nameserver problem more than a > > NetworkManager one. If you could add me to the CC-list of the bug that > > would be great too. > > I'm reluctant to file a bug without first verifying that the forwarders > are in fact supposed to be called in order. I've looked through the > copy of the BIND 9 Administrator's Reference Manual included with FC4, > but I couldn't find any explicit statement about whether forwarders MUST > be tried in the order given or MAY be tried in some arbitrary/random order. > > Do you know where this would be spelled out? Most likely in the BIND code. My guess though given the behavior is it does round-robin. I think the key here is not what BIND does, but what the DHCP specification says. If it says that clients must resolve names using the nameservers given in order, than what NetworkManager is doing is broken. If however it does not specify (this is my guess), then NetworkManager is not doing anything wrong, and the bug would lie in your network setup for giving non-internal nameservers in the DHCP response. In the latter case the internal server should simply forward queries for external names.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part