On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 03:41:25PM +0200, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
snip
Lastly I think it'd be good to filter the list of DNS servers and remove
duplicate entries. If there's consensus that this is a good idea I can put
together a patch that does this.
I can't see any benefit from having
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 08:29:12AM +, Ghennadi Procopciuc wrote:
Hi all,
We discovered a bug that occurs in two situations :
1.When many responses come simultaneously, c-ares reads only the first; after
that,
it awaits another notification for each of them. However, until a read
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 01:20:48PM -0700, Patrick Meehan wrote:
Since neither you nor I have all of the answers I think the hope is
that someone else on the list does. Personally I can't imagine a
better place to discuss issues involving using c-ares on various
platforms, but as it is your
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 06:37:52PM -0700, Patrick Meehan wrote:
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 5:57 PM, William Ahern
will...@25thandclement.com wrote:
snip
Thanks for the etiquette lesson, Bill.
If you had read my original post I'm sure you would have seen that I
did in fact google the problem
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 01:41:39PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 04:21:24PM -0800, William Ahern wrote:
This would be ???OpenBSD just wants to be difficult???. :-)
You get the same behavior on KAME stacks when net.inet6.ip6.v6only is 1,
which is the default
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 09:46:21AM +0100, Tommie Gannert wrote:
Ben Greear wrote:
On 11/09/2010 07:43 AM, Brian Yoder wrote:
One thing I did notice was that when a timeout is detected, the UDP
socket should not be closed. UDP is connection-less and oblivious to
whatever issues the server
Just got a non-blocking SPF resolver in something approximating working
order. SPF is a ridiculously complex spec (especially so asynchronously,
because of the recursion and macro language), and I ended up attacking it by
compiling the policies into a custom bytecode and executing the check in a
