Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:57:17 +0200 From: Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de> To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> Cc: Christian <list-christian@....de>, musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Resolver routines, Postfix DNSSEC troubles - how to check for incompatibilities? * 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. In my comment above, I specifically meant RES_DEFNAMES and RES_DNSRCH. RES_USE_EDNS0 seems different; I would expect applications to use their own DNS libraries if they need to access DNSSEC data and non-address record types (where there is no benefit gained form integrating with /etc/hosts or other data sources).
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.