[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: getaddrinfo: DNS round robin vs RFC3484 s6 rule 9, for etch



Cc: ftpmaster@debian.org, debian-release@lists.debian.org,
	debian-ctte@lists.debian.org

  Thanks to have kept glibc maintainers in the loop, that was
considerate.

On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 03:56:31PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I don't know if you've been following the argument on the TC list
> about bug #438179.  I think the Technical Committee are probably going
> to rule that sid's glibc ought to be changed so that it does not
> implement RFC3484 section 6 rule 9 prefix-length based sorting for
> IPv4.  This will restore the traditional DNS round robin.

  FWIW I still believe that someone in the thread had a point and that
getaddrinfo should use an extension being e.g. AI_UNSORTED and that the
issue should be raised to the IETF. But such a ruling in Debian
(disregarding Debian's internal power games) has a pretty limited scope,
and won't fix the fact that most OSes follow Rule 9 and that people that
use Debian on their servers will still need to use other techniques than
DNS RR until total world domination is achieved.

  If you build anything based on DNS RR, just be warned that then only
Debian hosts will honor the setup. Wouldn't it be 100% more productive
to bring it to the right place ?

  Oh and above anything else I find really intriguing that such a bad
functionality (at least it seems to be a pretty grave problem given the
length of some mails on the CT list) has slept in Debian for more than 2
years unnoticed.

> If you have difficulty posting, feel free to email any of the
> committee who'll be happy to forward your mail (apologies for the
> inconvenience, which is associated with our desire to keep the TC list
> very low on spam so that we can give it good attention).

  This argument is pure crap and prevent anyone interested to post to
the TC list. This has pissed me beyond repair on this problem, and I
believe I wasn't the only one. IMHO, the TC isn't functional with a
restricted mailing list. debian-release is not under the same
censorship, and looks though pretty functional to me.

Take care,
-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgp54qh9cxNOG.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: