>> So your issue that the results are inconsistent is certainly real. >> >> I'd say that the best way to avoid this is not having a search domain >> at all, or at the very least not several. >> > > Which is a totally unreasonable suggestion. > The problem here is not the search but different stoping > critera depending apon the address families supported by > the host or requested by the application. > Well, let's be fair. Search creates lots of problems other than this one. Right now there's not really any way to unambiguously specify a FQDN that works across all applications, has the same meaning across all applications, and has the same meaning independent of what host the query is being made from. That's a real problem. Yes, users like search, but it's arguably a Bad Idea, particularly in the absence of a universal syntax that says "don't subject this name to search". IMHO the stopping criterion should be that if there are _any_ RRs matching the name in a particular zone, the search should terminate. > We wrote a API that failed to account for the usual use > senario. In fact the guidance in there is the direct > opposite of what should be done with the usual use senario. > The "usual use scenario" is broken, and it's based on a previous poorly-designed API. > It perfectly fine for a MTA which get fully qualified names > in MX records then looks up the addresses. MTA's should > be disabling name searching in the resolver. That however > is not how most application work nor how the users of those > applications want them to work. They want to be able to > search. I've actually had requests to extend the number > if domains that can be in the search list. > I think you're grossly overgeneralizing here. Email is far from the only application that needs for DNS names to be unambiguous. And users would benefit from having DNS names being used consistently from one app to another, even though they may not realize this. >>> People like to use unqualified *and* partially qualified hostnames. >>> >> People also like to drive without seat belts. We don't let them do >> that either... Or at least, we don't listen to their complaints when >> the results are inferior to those obtained while driving _with_ a >> seatbelt. >> > > We also put air bags in cars to help those that don't use > saftey belts. > Maybe the equivalent of air bags in the case of DNS lookups would be having an API that refused to search any name containing a ".". Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf