[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120209134429.GC6663@umich.edu>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:44:29 -0500
From: Jim Rees <rees@...ch.edu>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: jmorris@...ei.org, keyrings@...ux-nfs.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, libc-alpha@...rceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Define ENONAMESERVICE and ENAMEUNKNOWN to indicate
name service errors
David Howells wrote:
Jim Rees <rees@...ch.edu> wrote:
> Define ENAMEUNKNOWN to indicate "Network name unknown". This can be used to
> indicate, for example, that an attempt was made by dns_query() to make a query,
> but the name server (e.g. a DNS server) replied indicating that it had no
> matching records.
>
> Would this be the same as NXDOMAIN? That is, does it mean the name server
> couldn't find a record, or does it mean that the record doesn't exist?
Is there a way to tell the difference? Can you store a negative record in the
DNS? Or is it that the DNS has records for the name, just not records of the
type you're looking for (eg. NO_ADDRESS/NO_DATA from gethostbyname())?
It's an important distinction to the resolver if you want to avoid dns
hijacking. See rfc2308. There doesn't seem to be a way to tell the
difference from the gethostbyname call, which was designed before this was a
problem. The on-the-wire dns query protocol does make the distinction.
I suspect kernel dns clients won't need to know the difference, but I think
it's useful if we decide on and document the meaning of the error codes.
Maybe the answer is that ENAMEUNKNOWN means the same as a HOST_NOT_FOUND
from gethostbyname().
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists