On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 12:50 AM, Keith Dart <ke...@dartworks.biz> wrote: > === On Sun, 11/08, James wrote: === >> Thoughts? >> - > === > > What I have done is bind named to a dummy interface, which serves a > psuedo TLD, and use dnsmasq for the local DNS. > > > 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast > inet 10.111.1.130/24 brd 10.111.1.255 scope global eth0 > 3: dummy0: <BROADCAST,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state > inet 172.17.211.1/24 brd 172.17.211.255 scope global dummy0 > > Then you have different interfaces to bind to, and different networks > to route to internally.
I'd rather not use named. tinydns seems simpler to set up (despite my problems) and is theoretically far more secure.
