Subject: Re: have there been any "recent" resolver fixes?
To: Andrew Brown <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/26/2000 15:23:31
[ On Friday, May 26, 2000 at 10:09:02 (-0400), Andrew Brown wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: have there been any "recent" resolver fixes?
> um...okay. i don't like nscd that much, but what do you have against
> doors? or do you simply not like things you know nothing about?
I know a fair bit about Solaris "doors" -- at least as much as can be
learned from reading the (now available) manual pages and from talking
to friends who've done internals programming on them.
The primary thing I don't like about them is that even their authors
were unsure for the longest time whether they were an answer to a
problem, or just a potential answer looking for a problem. From what
I've learned since I think there are much more elegant ways to do what
they do. Of course I really don't like Sun's RPC (in any incarnation)
either. Why can't people just do the easy thing and write simple IPC
protocols (eg. using ASCII commands and data)!?!?!?
> it might be, but i thought that (a) it had a cache, and (b) it had
> nothing to do with a host having no local zones, but rather to do with
> off-loading the heavy cryptographic burden of dnssec to something else
> (ie, so that it wasn't in the resolver library).
I thought Michael Graff already answered much of this....
Yes from examination of its source I see it does have a cache thread, so
I guess it does cache the responses it receives....
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <email@example.com> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Secrets of the Weird <email@example.com>