On Mo, 28.09.20 11:06, Andrew Lutomirski (luto@xxxxxxx) 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
