Hi, On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 04:18:43AM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > On Sun, May 04, 2003 at 09:03:09PM -0500, John Hasler wrote: > > I do have some new ideas I'm working on though. I should go through all > > those packages I found that mess with resolv.conf and see just exactly what > > they are doing and why. > > most of them require update to the current name servers. Since this is a > feature, which may also be wanted for running programs, I guess one of the > solutions could be to use a ipc shared memory segment. That way scripts can > change it without writing to a file and applications may be modified at > runtime. Of course sysv shared memory is a ugly beast and not all systems > may support it, but other things like kernel support may be harder to get. > Definitely this needs to be resolved by libc folk. Before you go down that road, have you looked at the suggestion of keeping the communication of nameservers file-based, but only solving the contention for the single /etc/resolv.conf? It's been implemented too, see Thomas Hood's resolvconf package. I think a file-based mechanism where the admin can *see* what's going on without stracing is much better than other mechanisms of IPC, wherever it's efficient enough. Considering the rate at which nameservers change, I'd say writing to files and calling a script to notify things (such as your local caching-only server) of the update is definitely good enough. Cheers, Emile. -- E-Advies - Emile van Bergen emile@e-advies.nl tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 http://www.e-advies.nl
Attachment:
pgp0gAYhgIvbo.pgp
Description: PGP signature