From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE4ED1382FE for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:07:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9B5BB21C080; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:07:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EA25E0962 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:07:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id o80so66732763wme.1 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 13:07:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jAYGBliZ/mdqmYYbqx8/A1LPvtTsAvg55w4wxApTOh0=; b=NVu4A1AAa/2lDRObLHc6VSxd5WjmXeStSpST2GxWahJcHVEOk/AR0yUvv45rL4aZTC 7oNIRRvNysFzvhhimaBDiNYe/xcVNokX0z8WOLUSE8dHnXjW4NoV+Nx9Jca7wvFW2phm QS54lcK9NyjpQbpY5z4zoBVDA84soEr/WsdNMYdR0VFgSrf7FiP8J538PYH23fswxWpl yTUMPYVnneCXQ6jYGiCK7EfO2xA+BkbQyoGuojuQ2zX/9dq4tIqMHckQr9XBh0+Jsuq0 SWs4Ctmbxra7QcM5/kg4C+iPTsBrkj87tru6yqL3EO4IVEcqxJ/aDsc6+QM7b6qn1wGc pyxg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jAYGBliZ/mdqmYYbqx8/A1LPvtTsAvg55w4wxApTOh0=; b=h7OBqgx4LIYvmATKg09rToM8XnDJ9AaPDfcCxoN2wRuujRAWXPbLqXksf+TODxmCVt udV4q135/xmxjElZRP57FMsvTq1bmLAf8kaJR9vn4S0YiqljjWpVbDhGYirApOBva2Nx oWVKBgWRdildyjNfIHKu2ee85wnijYDzsk230bxfzYI8oQGg8DYkjXPY+vqsk0AM2tLS UZIP6vOiuWMOYW6CakJEfUQgXXMJBu7jPdUCKMYTK/iTcmuH+1T8e6TIGK+GxbEo5xcr VanRvLiiMTgiNkznfjvMbiAeWvaE3Rxe7kE1GQgqAqgL35t2hFZ2aXHrJ5gsHDkW6AVy zjCA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJQhMhntdb4xQHh8C77jn8p4DL7ei7Nb1xSnJoo71vAnQLi+DNeAJhVolGbybBRPw== X-Received: by 10.28.93.65 with SMTP id r62mr15229986wmb.51.1468267655614; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 13:07:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.20.0.56] ([196.212.62.210]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f196sm24755129wmg.15.2016.07.11.13.07.33 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Jul 2016 13:07:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Wireless DHCP takes over resolv.conf To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <1659782.mMxfcyeGIg@dell_xps> <2702860.O34opDXgWm@dell_xps> From: Alan McKinnon Message-ID: <5783FC83.50307@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 22:07:31 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2702860.O34opDXgWm@dell_xps> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0fbf70e6-5071-420c-9e28-5fc7117a76f8 X-Archives-Hash: f97da1c2f58598932b1ba46f186e4bdc On 11/07/2016 20:13, Mick wrote: > On Monday 11 Jul 2016 17:31:29 Alan McKinnon wrote: >> On 11/07/2016 10:32, Emanuele Rusconi wrote: >>> Wouldn't it be better to just use the same servers for both wired and >>> wireless? It's what I use and it works flawlessly. >> >> It works flawlessly *for you*, but by no means can you consider it >> correct or stable. >> >> There is no guarantee that a wired and wireless network will use the >> same dns caches. > > Yep, furthermore this is a laptop which is taken around the place and plugged > in and out of wired and wireless networks. > > >> If it happens to work, great, use it. But be aware there will come a day >> when that is no longer true. > > When I get a minute I'll have a look at net-dns/openresolv which Fernando > suggested. I think it will do what want. > why don't you go with the dns server addresses supplied by each network's dhcp? Presumably the admin put them their because they work on that network.