From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/8783 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Re: Would not love to see reconsideration for domain and search Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 14:08:31 -0400 Message-ID: <20151026180831.GG8645@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20151026161639.GF8645@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20151026174148.23543.qmail@ary.lan> 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 1445882941 23812 80.91.229.3 (26 Oct 2015 18:09:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 18:09:01 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-8796-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Oct 26 19:08:55 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZqmCM-0003hA-52 for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 19:08:46 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 7506 invoked by uid 550); 26 Oct 2015 18:08:44 -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 7486 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2015 18:08:43 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151026174148.23543.qmail@ary.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:8783 Archived-At: On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 05:41:48PM -0000, John Levine wrote: > >Note that ndots=1 search is rather harmless as long as ICANN has a > >prohibition on top-level domains resolving to an address. > > That horse left the barn over 15 years ago: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7085 > > ICANN currently has a rule against it for generic TLDs, but they have > no control over two-letter country codes, and as our RFC notes, a lot > of ccTLDs have had A and MX records. This is probably an argument for a default of ndots=0, to avoid a regression looking up such names. > I say currently because Google asked for an exception to put an A > record to make http://search/ work, and it took some discussion before > ICANN said no. The no was as much about anti-competitive reasons, the > default would be to Google's search engine, as the technical issues. > If someeone else asked, they'd probably say no, but it's not cast in > stone. > > In response to another question about search order, the default value > of ndots is 1, so any domain name with at least one dot, such as > frodo.cs, is looked up directly before it tries a search list. You This is the behavior on glibc and most/all other legacy implementations. The proposed musl behavior would not search at all in the dots>=ndots case. > can set ndots to anything you want, but I expect that your users would > not be happy if gmail.com and yahoo.com could be shadowed by local host > names. Indeed, users setting up search domains and ndots>1 need to be careful that they control the contents of those domains and that they don't shadow anything needed from the global scope. This was a lot easier before the ridiculous arbitrary-string TLDs were added. IMO use of search domains is pretty much an outdated idea (that poses serious risks of future breakage) but without the global-to-search fallback that legacy implementions have (i.e. with the proposed musl implementation), at least the risk of breakage is isolated to inability to resolve _new_ domains rather than failure to resolve existing ones that previously worked. Rich