From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 25 19:24:13 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F1E837B404 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 19:24:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from fe3.cox-internet.com (fe3-cox.cox-internet.com [66.76.2.40]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8AF943FD7 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 19:24:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from daved@nostrum.com) Received: from nostrum.com ([208.180.29.144]) by fe3.cox-internet.com 9a2f9096933fa391a6c2fc942f8b01bd) with ESMTP id <20030326032406.PZEJ20598.fe3@nostrum.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 21:24:06 -0600 Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 21:24:09 -0600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) To: Terry Lambert From: David J Duchscher In-Reply-To: <3E811499.93BC4550@mindspring.com> Message-Id: <6888D394-5F3A-11D7-90A2-0003930B3DA4@nostrum.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-21.6 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_APPLEMAIL autolearn=ham version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Resolver Issues (non valid hostname characters) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 03:24:16 -0000 X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 03:24:16 -0000 On Tuesday, March 25, 2003, at 08:46 PM, Terry Lambert wrote: > Marius Strom wrote: >> I've submitted a PR for this: misc/50299 documenting the RFC >> mis-following (is that a word?) as well as a patch for res_comp.c. > > Great. > > If this is committed before RFC-952 is updated, FreeBSD users > can now define host names that break other machines on the net > which are strictly conformant to RFC-952. Which will just make us behave like rest of the world. I have tested resolvers on Solaris, Windows, MacOS X, MacOS 9, IRIX, Linux, AIX. They all will resolve a name with an underscore character. Only the *BSD boxes fail because of the check. > What is the first maxim of protocol design? > > "Be generous in what you accept, strict in what you generate". Which is why I would argue that the patch should be committed, maybe with an option to enable it. We are talking about the resolver, not a DNS or hostname server. The resolver should resolve the name, be generous. It just depends at what level you apply the maxim. The check should be in the DNS server not in the resolver IMHO. DaveD