Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 17:32:15 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Incompatible behaviour of res_query(3) w.r.t. NXDOMAIN On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 11:04:49PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Rich Felker: > > > Hmm, I think in this case the "better" might be sufficient that we > > want to keep it and pressure other implementations to change too. A > > program performing a lookup where the result is NxDomain may very well > > want to know whether that's an authenticated (by DNSSEC) NxDomain or > > one in an insecure zone. Returning an error to the caller with no > > packet contents discards this critical data. > > Isn't this the behavior you'd get with res_send? > > I think such error translation is precisely the point of the res_query > convenience function (along with the implicit construction of the > query packet). Does such a distinction exist? I thought res_query was just equivalent to res_mkquery+res_send and that calling res_send directly would get you the same errors. If they are different then I suspect some applications are doing the wrong thing calling res_query here and should be using res_mkquery+res_send... Rich
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.