Re: lwresd

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 15:59 +0100, Thom May wrote:
> Hi guys,
> did anything come of making NM use lwresd/libnss-lwresd? It still seems like
> a far preferrable route than using bind as the local resolver.

Not really, the amount of work here is non trivial:

1) Write an NSS module that can deal with the format of the resolv.conf
we'd like to write out (split DNS and all) that talks to lwresd (~1000
or so LOC)

2) Fix lwresd, since the code hasn't really be touched in a year or two,
it doesn't respect DNS TTL, and a few other issues.

lwresd code is stale and of course we don't know about the bugs.  When I
looked at this option back in Feb/March, it would have taken about a
month of work to get something useful.  I'm of the opinion that work
would be better directed towards adding support into NetworkManager for
Simon Kelley's lightweight caching nameserver, which he said now talks
DBUS.

Dan