| 6 Sep 2025 |
 K900 | Supposedly fixed in v6 but I'm not going to find out | 13:18:55 |
| K900 | Possibly ever | 13:18:59 |
 aloisw | Well integrated in what sense? | 13:19:10 |
 raitobezarius | in the sense of supporting multiple interfaces | 13:19:26 |
| aloisw | What do you mean by "supporting multiple interfaces"? | 13:20:13 |
| raitobezarius | DNS server per link | 13:20:24 |
| aloisw | Also weird timeouts when the machine is offline. | 13:20:36 |
| aloisw | I'm not sure I understand what you would like to do there? | 13:22:59 |
| raitobezarius | systemd-resolved supports answering to DNS queries which are meant for a specific link with a DNS server specific to that link | 13:23:25 |
| raitobezarius | useful when you have a VPN with its own DNS server for internal zones | 13:23:37 |
| aloisw | So basically multiplexing between different upstreams, with both the zone and the upstream server assigned to the link in some way? | 13:29:06 |
| raitobezarius | yep | 13:29:12 |
| aloisw | Yeah I'd not really expect unbound or knot-resolver to support that in a nice way indeed. Their expected use case seems more to let them do recursion themselves. | 13:31:00 |
| aloisw | I guess if the links are static, you could configure the forwarding manually. But it's going to be annoying if they can come and go dynamically. | 13:39:46 |
| 7 Sep 2025 |
 emily | raitobezarius: do you have an estimate for how soon you plan to amend the drop PR in Nixpkgs? | 02:35:38 |
| emily | would be great to move forward with toml11 and if 2.93 is all that's required there it would be convenient | 02:35:54 |
