On Mo, 28.09.20 11:06, Andrew Lutomirski (l...@mit.edu) wrote:

> Indeed, the problem you're trying to solve is hard.
>
> > systemd-resolved is not supposed to be a real DNS *server*. It's
> > supposed to be a good, combined client for the popular name resolution
> > protocols, and the fact that we also listen on a port 53 is mostly to
> > provide compat with local app code that doesn't go through glibc NSS
> > for its name resolution needs. If you expect a full blown DNS server
> > on port 53 then it's not what systemd-resolved is or strives to be.
>
> Then perhaps you should have a libsystemdresolvedclient and start
> convincing programs that want this behavior to use it.

Oh, we did. It's called "glibc NSS". It's pretty popular, but not
popular enough as name resolution API apparently... I doubt we could
ever be more successful than glibc with any C library I guess.

I figure we come from different generations though: C libraries is not
how you gonna convince Java or Rust or Go peope. In particular as this
is an IPC question anyway, not a language binding question.

We offer our APIs via four ways these days:

1. Via D-Bus
2. Via Varlink
3. Via NSS (through the nss-resolve module, which is ultimately just a
   wrapper around the D-Bus/Varlink thing)
4. Via local DNS stub on 127.0.0.53

As it turns out the latter kinda works everywhere, it's hard to make a
case for everyone to not use it if it works for this stuff. It uses
DNS as local IPC. Which is pretty universal, and just works for almost
everyone.

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering, Berlin
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to