From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5104 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Re: Resolver overhaul concepts Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 22:36:53 -0400 Message-ID: <20140510023653.GN26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20140504124238.GA24010@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <536665C5.7060302@skarnet.org> <20140504162437.GA27258@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <536D7B08.8030403@mit.edu> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1399689437 5092 80.91.229.3 (10 May 2014 02:37:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 02:37:17 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-5109-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat May 10 04:37:10 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Wix9w-000220-7j for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 10 May 2014 04:37:08 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 22230 invoked by uid 550); 10 May 2014 02:37:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 22222 invoked from network); 10 May 2014 02:37:05 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <536D7B08.8030403@mit.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:5104 Archived-At: On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 06:04:08PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > The policy for supporting something like nss has always been that musl > > implements a perfectly reasonable public protocol for providing any > > back-end you want: the DNS protocol. You can run a local daemon > > speaking DNS and serving names from any backend you like, and this is > > the correct way to achieve it (rather than linking random buggy, > > likely-not-namespace-clean libraries into the application's address > > space). In order to make this the most useful, though, musl should > > support nameservers on non-default ports (is there a standard syntax > > for this, or can we support one without breaking anything?), and it > > would also be nice to be able to override resolv.conf on a per-process > > basis (e.g. via the environment). > > How about 'nameserver /path/to/unix/socket'? If glibc supported that, > too, it might solve a lot of problems involving systemwide resolvers and > containers. > > This might have to be 'unixsocknameserver /path/to/unix/socket' or > something for better interoperability. I don't see any convincing reason to support this. It greatly complicates the lookup code (having to have 2+ sockets instead of just one, having to support different address/protocol families, ...) and doesn't let you do anything you can't already do with AF_INET[6] and udp. There's also no precedent, which rather defeats the principle of not inventing new mechanisms for something where there's already a fully-general option available. Rich