From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 30 19:09:59 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEC1B37B401 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:09:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-relay.omnis.com (smtp-relay.omnis.com [216.239.128.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29E0F43F93 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:09:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from softweyr.homeunix.net (66-91-236-204.san.rr.com [66.91.236.204]) by smtp-relay.omnis.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9446A42FC1; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:09:57 -0800 (PST) From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr To: "Louis A. Mamakos" , Terry Lambert Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:09:56 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <3E864AD1.6C1C3656@mindspring.com> <200303300205.h2U25vDN037209@whizzo.transsys.com> In-Reply-To: <200303300205.h2U25vDN037209@whizzo.transsys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200303301909.56776.wes@softweyr.com> cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Allow underscores in DNS names X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 03:10:02 -0000 On Saturday 29 March 2003 18:05, Louis A. Mamakos wrote: > > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > > > The attached patch, inspired by a discussion on -STABLE, modifies > > > our resolver library to allow underscores in host names, by > > > classifying the underscore as a hyphen character. Even though > > > RFC952 forbids them, underscores are becoming increasingly common > > > in DNS, and they are sometimes used for mechanisms (such as > > > Microsoft's automatic proxy configuration scheme) which we might > > > want to support in FreeBSD. > > > > There was a better patch that made it an option in resolv.conf, > > rather than turning it on all the time. > > This is great, except that you'd don't need to have a resolv.conf > on your system at all; the resolver will default to using a local > caching nameserver. In this case, you WILL need a resolv.conf if you want to use underscores,=20 then, won't you? > > FreeBSD should be standards compliant, by default, and take work > > to make it possible to give bogus data to other hosts on the > > Internet who can not handle "_" or other characters because they > > *are* standars compliant. > > Since this is a resolver option, you're not handing out names to > other hosts using the DNS infrastructure. > > > "Be conservative in what you send." > > And liberal in what you receive, which is exactly what modifing > the resolver to not cause gethostbyname() and it's ilk to barf > on these types of names. > > There are lots of things in ancient RFCs which probably do not > make as much sense these days as they once did.=20 I strongly suspect that this discussion, like many in the networking=20 arena, are caused by a pack of fools not bothering to read the RFCs=20 before plunging off on a tangent and then later calling their stupidity a=20 'feature' rather than admitting they made a mistake. Nothing about the advisability of using wild character sets in DNS names=20 has changed except for the widespread misuse of it by a certain=20 implementation that fails to enforce the RFC requirements. This is not=20 necessarily a good reason to adulterate FreeBSD. I'm not arguing for or against any position, just making sure the=20 conversation stays on track. This is not a matter of FreeBSD being=20 wrong, it's a matter of whether we want to follow Microsofts breakage. > If there is a > security issue in applications, they should get fixed regardless. > All this heartburn over what the gethostbyname() library function > chooses to believe from the DNS still doesn't address getting > hostnames out of NIS or /etc/hosts. Especially since we have a new implementation of gethostbyname on the way,= =20 from a programmer who doesn't suck. That doesn't mean we won't have to=20 fix the old one in 4.x, but it does mean we won't have to keep patching=20 the old one with every other hairbrained DNS naming scheme (i.e. the Big5=20 vs. UTF argument) some other batch of morons comes up with. =2D-=20 Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket? Wes Peters wes@softweyr.com