From: Philip Sanetra <code@psanetra.de>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: "Cristian Rodríguez" <cristian@rodriguez.im>,
"John Levon" <levon@movementarian.org>,
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Issue with stale resolv.conf state
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 09:09:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6ub5eKxOn0FQjpGnKallLX7efkpiH7n3rsuWs9Y3srhn_NIQv9aSpRYjWMhAe4GZTlvAleP-Ok-4rrKhhlwT5BFwTjkBaIPkl62sBRWyi6A=@psanetra.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ttlcvth8.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1671 bytes --]
Hi,
I think removing the automatic downgrade without also making the single-request option the defeault behavior would break a lot of systems.
I know of at least two environments in different companies where the default behavior results in 5 seconds timeouts and only the automatic downgrade improves performance in subsequent DNS lookups.
I would appreciate using single-request option as default, like mentioned in https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29017
Regards,
Philip Sanetra
On Tuesday, 12 March 2024 at 7:45 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> * Cristian Rodríguez:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 7:51 AM Florian Weimer fweimer@redhat.com wrote:
> >
> > > * John Levon:
> >
> > cessing).
> >
> > > Maybe we should just remove the automatic downgrade, basically not
> > > persist this across queries anymore.
> >
> > Yeah. +1. Users of those broken nameservers deserve at least noticing
> > they are wrong if such systems are really still around ..
>
>
> I filed:
>
> Automatic activation of single-request options break resolv.conf reloading
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31476
>
>
> On the other hand, we have this request:
>
> | Change resolv.conf default to single-request
> | […]
> | We have the year 2022 and these issues still occur, so it was not some
> | kind of issue that went away by time as it was possibly expected when
> | glibc 2.10 was released.
>
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29017
>
>
> So the solution might not be so straightforward.
>
> Thanks,
> Florian
[-- Attachment #1.2: publickey - code@psanetra.de - 0x61B5EBD7.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 645 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 249 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-12 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-11 9:08 John Levon
2024-03-11 10:51 ` Florian Weimer
2024-03-12 0:51 ` Cristian Rodríguez
2024-03-12 6:45 ` Florian Weimer
2024-03-12 9:09 ` Philip Sanetra [this message]
2024-03-12 10:04 ` John Levon
2024-03-12 14:25 ` Cristian Rodríguez
2024-03-12 14:30 ` Florian Weimer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='6ub5eKxOn0FQjpGnKallLX7efkpiH7n3rsuWs9Y3srhn_NIQv9aSpRYjWMhAe4GZTlvAleP-Ok-4rrKhhlwT5BFwTjkBaIPkl62sBRWyi6A=@psanetra.de' \
--to=code@psanetra.de \
--cc=cristian@rodriguez.im \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=levon@movementarian.org \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).