name resolution

[Xen]

Tom H schreef op 23-11-2017 22:32:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Xen <list at xenhideout.nl> wrote:
>> 
>> I just think it's another bad choice and it happens to have been 
>> pushed by
>> mr. SystemD himself.
>> 
>> Yes, Lennart Poettering also maintains the Avahi packages.
>> 
>> It's the same kind of "Your opinions don't matter" approach that we 
>> see
>> everywhere else.
>> 
>> He writes:
>> 
>> " Please note: The line above makes nss-mdns authoritative for the
>> .local domain. If you have a unicast DNS domain with the same name you
>> will no longer be able to resolve hosts from it. mDNS and a unicast
>> DNS domain named .local are inherently incompatible. Please contact
>> your local admistrator and ask him to move to a different domain name
>> since .local is to be used exclusively for Zeroconf technology.
>> [26]Further information."
>> 
>> "is to be used"
>> 
>> Because they decide that.
>> 
>> This encroachment on personal liberty goes on everywhere.
> 
> It was an Apple decision not Lennart one.

Apple didn't decide for the rest of the world.

Today Apple has a market share of about 11% with OS X, but in 2009 this 
was 3,7%.

There is no reason whatsoever that mDNS has to precede DNS.

The only "reason" for that is to prevent leakage onto the internet, 
which are queries to the root domain for .local, which returns NULL.

At every stage, this can be blocked by DNS servers, and probably is.

If you put mDNS AFTER dns, it will still work, and not frustrate 
operation of the DNS system.

The delay in first accessing the global DNS system and only then mDNS is 
minimal.

The reverse is not true; mDNS has a timeout of about 4 seconds or 
nearing that.

So by all extents and purposes, you should put mDNS AFTER DNS, unless of 
course


YOU WANT TO EXTINGUISH THE USE OF THE LOCAL DOMAIN BY FORCIBLE MEASURES.

Which they are doing.

Not practical necessity.

Politics.