Still getting my head around Plan9 but wouldn’t mounting the unicast and multicast DNS file servers over the top of each other work? (I assume the order of the mount (bind) would lead to resolution order… but maybe no unified responses.
Marc > On 2 Jan 2016, at 2:42 pm, erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net> wrote: > > On Fri Jan 1 19:32:25 PST 2016, m...@boschma.cx wrote: >> >>> On 2 Jan 2016, at 7:05 am, Steve Simon <st...@quintile.net> wrote: >>> anyone done any work to implement mDNS / bonjour on plan9? >>> >> >> No, but I have an interest; just starting out with Plan9 :) >> >>> my rough plan is to write a file server which generates /lib/ndb/mdns >>> which can be included into your /lib/ndb/local. >>> >>> I fear the biggest hassle is the clash of UDP port use may mean >>> mDNS must become part of dns(1) rather than a separate file server. >>> >> >> Shouldn’t dns(1) only bind to unicast UDP port and thus mDNS could bind to >> the multicast UDP port? >> >> Are you only considering resolution or also publishing services? > > it would make sense to me to make a dnsudp request file server that manages > requests, and > fork (ha!) that task off to it. this file server would not care if it's > querying normal dns, > or mdns. > > - erik
