On 27-sep-2007, at 3:33, Mark Andrews wrote:
So your issue that the results are inconsistent is certainly real.
I'd say that the best way to avoid this is not having a search domain
at all, or at the very least not several.
Which is a totally unreasonable suggestion.
It's not. Even without IPv6, having search domains means you can get
unexpected results. If that's not acceptable, don't complain, but put
a period behind your FQDNs.
The problem here is not the search but different stoping
critera depending apon the address families supported by
the host or requested by the application.
We wrote a API that failed to account for the usual use
senario. In fact the guidance in there is the direct
opposite of what should be done with the usual use senario.
I thought the solution would be hard or would be suboptimal in the
common case, but I think that doesn't have to be so.
In my example, MacOS would go through the search domains and keep
going until it found AAAA records for IPv6 or IPv4+IPv6 applications
(and presumably look for A records if there were no AAAA records and
IPv4 was present/requested also).
So basically, both the "answers = 0, noerror" and "nxdomain"
responses trigger trying the next search domain. If we change this to
"answers = 0, noerror" means try the same FQDN again for an A record,
and "nxdomain" means move on to the next search domain, the results
for different permutations of IP version availability would all
result in connecting to the same FQDN = the first one with an address
that's compatible with current connectivity, rather than the first
one with an AAAA record if there is IPv6 connectivity.
I'm saying we should go back and fix the specification for
getaddrinfo() so that it accounts for searching.
Volunteers...?
We should also add a AI_NOSEARCH flag so that searching is
controlled directly rather than indirectly.
That's what the period terminating a domain name is for.
I've set Reply-To to ipv6(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org as this is more approriate
for 6man.
No, it's a DNS issue, so it should go to dnsop. dnsop people: see
discussion between Mark, Keith and me that started under the subject
"renumbering" on the ietf discussion list.
Everyone: feel free to prune some lists when you respond. :-)
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf