Sounds fine to me. We had overlapping support for c-ares and ADNS for a while, so this isn't new territory. Can you open an issue and set the milestone to "Wireshark 5.x" so this doesn't get lost?
On 8/20/23 12:08 PM, Jaap Keuter wrote:
Hi, So we’ve been using the c-ares name resolver for a while now and it’s serving its purpose. However, this is not the only one out there. DNS technologies have evolved somewhat and c-ares does not provide for them. Would it make sense to start looking into using libunbound[1] as a replacement for c-ares to bring these technologies in reach. From a cursory look it seems that the current structure can be retained while shoehorning in unbound. Thoughts? It could be something we could try to achieve for 5.0. [1] https://nlnetlabs.nl/projects/unbound/about/ Jaap ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
