On 9/29/20 9:18 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
So let me ExecSum what I wrote here. For systemd-resolved to become a high quality DNS solution:1) Remove custom DNS/DNSSEC resolving code and use a well maintained DNS library."Custom" is in the eye of the beholder. It appears to me you mean that in a derogatory way. I mean, given that Ubuntu has been enabling systemd-resolved since quite some time by default I have the suspicion our codebase is more often deployed IRL than the ones you listed?
Ubuntu enables it by default, but we don't know how many people use it. My employer does not. Our AD domain has a LOT of controllers, due to a large number of offices around the world. systemd-resolved couldn't handle resolving the A record for our domain, so we had to turn it off.
I believe that was fixed in PR 11993, but that bug was enough to convince me very solidly that systemd-resolved should have re-used an existing protocol implementation rather than writing another one.
You're right that DNS has of quirks and compatibility issues, and that's exactly why writing another protocol implementation is such a poor decision.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
