> Matus UHLAR - fantomas a écrit : > >I just thought that there's no logical reason to reordering addresses if > >resolver does not know network topology. So I'd like to know the reason for > >reordering. Is it the way how resolver manipulates addresses, so it stores > >them in reverse order?
On 02.06.06 11:33, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Yes probably something internal, I don't know exactly. You could have a > look at the code to find why. Thank you, I'll try to searching deeper :) > >>So the glibc is fully compliant with the RFC. There is nothing wrong > >>with it. > >except it spoils any attempt to sort RRs so they are in network topology > >order :-( > Yes but it is allowed, so that's probably your implementation which is > buggy. Anyway, I wouldn't rely on something that is not guaranteed... I don't rely on it. "irc.sk" points to difefrent servers, both are working. I just wondered why can't I use the closest one, if DNS returns RRs in such order... -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. My mind is like a steel trap - rusty and illegal in 37 states. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
