Suggestion: Remove Dnsmasq support - unbound and BIND is more than enough

[nzkiwi68]

With the awesome BIND plugin and unbound, probably a great time to remove dnsmasq entirely.

Surely nobody needs Dnsmasq anymore, unbound or BIND surely will do.

If really necessary to somehow still keep Dnsmasq, then don't auto install it and offer it as an optional plugin, but, I'd be happy to see it removed entirely.

[franco]

Bad assumptions make for sloppy execution.

Sure, we changed the standard a while back but more than enough people had issues and still have with Unbound, especially in resolver mode.

Taking working DNS away in an upgrade is not a strategy.


Cheers,
Franco

[marjohn56]

Is that the assume that makes an ass out of u and me?  :P

[nzkiwi68]

ok!

A softer approach could be on new installations;
Make dnsmasq as a plugin and not installed by default and the default DNS unbound.

I obviously don't see the number of installations and problems you see...


Thanks for taking the time to reply.

[franco]

To be frank I've been that "ass" from time to time, but we live and we learn and we need to think about how to ease migration, because:

1. Users don't like changes.
2. Changes are hard.
3. Nobody reads migration notes.
4. Breaking DNS breaks everything.

In this particular case some people use Dnsmasq and Unbound in tandem already. The only viable migration is to let the upgrade install dnsmasq if it is enabled in the config -- a simple concept that requires new facilities and conditional code that will last for ages worst case.

There is not an issue for new users here at all. We could even make Dnsmasq a plugin and add it to the image by default (this is the case with os-dyndns already because people asked for it after it "went away" as a plugin).

One could argue that the standard install (plugin or as is now) is a better approach because if you cannot get Unbound to work how are you going to install Dnsmasq?

I'm not seeing a lot of room here and it requires more work than is maybe even necessary to fit most expectation and sadly never all of them.  :)


Cheers,
Franco

[nzkiwi68]

Fair enough.

As I say, I obviously don't see the huge install base that you do, dnsmasq seems very redundant to me, but, as you say it's just not simple.

[Exinus]

I also guess it's time to make dnsmasq just a plugin. Its not really needed in most installations anymore.

[franco]

As stated earlier, good luck with that. ;)


Cheers,
Franco