On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:17 PM, P J P <pj.pandit(a)yahoo.co.in> wrote:
Hi,
> On Tuesday, 29 April 2014 10:08 PM, Andrew Lutomirski <luto(a)mit.edu> wrote:
>>> but the container itself runs in a network namespace, so it gets its own
>>> loopback device. This will mean 127.0.0.1:53 points to the container itself,
>>> not the host, so dns resolving in the container will not work.
Ah, interesting! Thank you so much for sharing these details.
> OTOH, it would be straightforward to write a tiny stub that forwards
> 127.0.0.1:53 to something outside the container.
I think this is a better option than having a different device address like 127.0.0.53.
Forwarding traffic from inside namespace to a loop-back device on the host is analogous to
a guest(VM) forwarding traffic to its host via bridge interface.
FWIW, this approach has other benefits. For example, virtme could use
it to avoid hacks like trying to bind-mount something on top of
/etc/resolv.conf. Some day I hope to propose explicit virtme guest
support as a Fedora feature, and, if /etc/resolv.conf were to have
constant, predetermined contents, a major wart would go away.
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/kernel/virtme/virtme.git
--Andy