From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 28714 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2020 17:51:40 -0000 Received-SPF: pass (mother.openwall.net: domain of lists.openwall.com designates 195.42.179.200 as permitted sender) receiver=inbox.vuxu.org; client-ip=195.42.179.200 envelope-from= Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with UTF8ESMTPZ; 13 Apr 2020 17:51:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 24241 invoked by uid 550); 13 Apr 2020 17:51:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 24220 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2020 17:51:35 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=web.de; s=dbaedf251592; t=1586800284; bh=6WJfWfJwcCDDy1YrGBCIpYN3g2iZfSHNzJeYPOQC4Iw=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=Ae33xK6dMIvAP5Ia5NxsQjtr64XcsPoRzu5dhkdiATceS9qeYLmnIrI8QqpIjh722 FUrYKs54Mk2pPwouDUzMufsf0+RVsMQbKwZbr+ErOJfslxNyW9GsM6MM41J0OC/aBR YofkXwpGoG2tqH6WV5WzBLQlqJaAOUnphbI4Rjoc= X-UI-Sender-Class: c548c8c5-30a9-4db5-a2e7-cb6cb037b8f9 Message-ID: <441f511075bfd135bda2cd3da337bf4572f47a4f.camel@web.de> From: Christian To: musl@lists.openwall.com Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 19:51:23 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20200413163800.GV11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <9832107bf742db3145a3960c28cde867f924fe1f.camel@web.de> <4524b127ea99b2d1edcd8c91555a9af21e46a9b3.camel@web.de> <87imi32xj1.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <20200413163800.GV11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:UcKvb0Dsr5BL0COgrqrY+DRrx80NdOdL54rTmtDeNZ7laUMOf0S dv5AR/3+eflGZWVkG+L00NLYCaIJJpoUH1z1JVzZWKYVIZOQJfj5mlN8DvSbfhcQBPInthG Tiw5KeB+4GTscz8O7Mdcro698NGp4Nf3EORb/bK8qLk4/R5QP4uVu1w2dBRa/pRWwAl7rBp Wj9N2rbIPEB6EePDq5/mA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:fwiFmP0tqZg=:kqA4Pcsb2u2vAqNEXLfvVw vbn6IhaQwwE2Uu8I//ws/WhyEaMwrDL/IfTXVSjTAqaXjNRj/QbpG2Ec0JmdhqinlBY2GWpbm 8hEuvsp8cZGmOlQOXZVcjNDfettj8XE4VsnZsGQ0+T+mZ1+4WZAXeHXKoF1y4iEkBbfjrzl/U uH4GuGupk0Xyr9gY0+NA03hZQkj2ObF3vmdk0TzXWF+QympnIb2/RA0Ck6BAqd6/ixMsrLkmr lAVdE6NwDq1PAOh2/YAxorTDZb0GFH9ylRFMThG+cWn+cB1OfvMiTQhNk6mujHbrpwZVidA5r Dpi39MhUinI1tykesaO77OlqUGgxYZq6+DI8zOiDwFvqyZ7Qmt6rboX0/GMOquClI7qWnqo6R 45rIj25ozPsMTHgHAqD6Jht8MMiLpR4P4xsbJprzJB6T0Trby9dOESK3lO5wwyWIuvAs5pH25 7tqLsKwTkdmFnPv7TdGd0Js7TnhNYIDyB1Nk2jcTT1jNmACrrxdhaMZbTpK/50IRdgtFTTLot /HF+zAAaOHgyGq5sDTR/ay5o/0v1+Fhwe+x/GbAZ/3RvczsKKujkko4AJ7QZlAQ1FhlJWiooV LJLZ+KNp8QXNSYcksbOoEypVhXzVeRwf54tJ0kjKVKptEVRIMhHLNeRO/W+TSvBnN8RXHJ764 z01pH+JIZ27F6f0GD4u26BKSkJpjNy3ws8Kyw2xN0+Oto0FhggaXjCXhfNJJs7HL720zn/vNI 6XQ4/ioAdSjrdGFIuncYYrw7ZozGBhcAI0WQsdVH14/C3vnwLvkCR2rZByy4airBjWrAf0pip yAfqxILS8/xzdeebB5JVED3VsMn5sUOITVZXd/FX5n/bjHIgSJYYULIvW/kSdPN1D1eYBNJ3m CPlWAXrxDIaY8A1GOkFBqIbGkojIjeypp0O3jxGse/09XuSvmKkOk6qiqbwgybvHmCpjeFXBd 5ynnMBe3q9dCmzQilyjPKdUdVTuvFRIdK4rALbSQfRegqJL2PCQy/rUimwD5GhhpbiQ3SwJyS 83jXC49NR7OQ6npAjBMgyHszeaIXkBcThKZht3SRKFEfl0p+KMTaLYHDm2inVMnC/FPG/wxLO 5dZ/ZdpqLu6Nwd2oY8bUr9U7CaU1ZwSQJz4T0MsNq97Rj7u7FL1TnMmVe/65UyXroRJhsD/4u RhEHEGBFnQiQ0NBt3aGxIOG4TrxdNRMpF/QpJMQbpSht8arGH18Pt5gLa20J2T3GxqKsQU77D IE0cndJGW3DdppPJq Subject: Re: [musl] Resolver routines, Postfix DNSSEC troubles - how to check for incompatibilities? Am Montag, den 13.04.2020, 12:38 -0400 schrieb Rich Felker: > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 05:52:34PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Christian: > > > So Viktor did some digging: > > "The comment on line 25: > > https://github.com/runtimejs/musl-libc/blob/master/include/resolv.h#L25 > > is not encouraging. It suggests that _res is unused. If so, Postfix > DNS does not work correctly with this C library. And not just for > DANE, since Postfix is also unable to to control RES_DEFNAMES and > RES_DNSRCH. > > Are these changes to the RES_DEFNAMES and RES_DNSRCH flags really > necessary? Why doesn't Postfix use res_query (or perhaps res_send) as > appropriate? > > But to actually answer these questions, modifying the flags is > presumably because traditional req_query builds an rfc1035 query or > edns query based on these flags derived from from resolv.conf, and > Postfix either assumes or wants to support the case where resolv.conf > is not already configured for edns, perhaps because it was generated > by a dhcp client. > > Rich > > I can't tell you much on the coding or why it is this way. I am merely a user that found the incompatibility. If this is of interest, you might want to get in contact with Viktor, e.g. via the postfix users mailing list. FYI: I just moved my config to a glibc setup in debian and it is working without issues, hence confirming Viktors finding, that Postfix won't work with musl