|
Message-ID: <20240308172238.GO4163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 12:22:38 -0500 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: Markus Wichmann <nullplan@....net> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com, David Schinazi <dschinazi.ietf@...il.com> Subject: Re: mDNS in musl On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 04:31:02PM +0100, Markus Wichmann wrote: > Am Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 04:17:44PM -0800 schrieb David Schinazi: > > I'm definitely supportive of the slippery slope argument, but I think > > there's still a real line between mDNS and NetBIOS. mDNS uses a different > > transport but lives inside the DNS namespace, whereas NetBIOS is really its > > own thing - NetBIOS names aren't valid DNS hostnames. > > One thing that came to me after thinking about it: This really puts a > wrenchs in the works of the "just proxy it" argument. Not for mDNS, but > more generally for further possible backends for the list of hosts. If > you want to support a backend that supports names that DNS can't, then > proxying isn't a solution. Who said we want support for names that DNS can't support? > We may have to look into integrating nscd support into the search for > host names. We already have it for passwd queries, after all. And then > of course there are all the attendant questions: > - Do we query nscd always or only with some config option? > - Do we query nscd after DNS or vice-versa? Is this not a policy > question? > - Is nscd failure authoritative? > &c., &c. The nscd wire format for hostnames is just bad. For example it can't convey scope_id in IPv6 results, while musl's /etc/hosts implementation can and does, making it actually useful for link-local addresses. Maybe it could be extended, but I don't see any point in worrying about this until there's a concrete need, which has not been shown. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.