Patches to have dnscache listen on multiple IP addresses

[Mark Johnson-21]

I've received a couple requests to add support for dnscache listening
on multiple IP addresses to zinq-djbdns.  I see this patch available:

  http://danp.net/djbdns/dnscache-1.05-multiple-ip.patch

Thoughts?  Anybody know of any other patches to do this?  I'm not
trying to start another debate over whether you should run multiple
instances of dnscache or run one instance listening on multiple
addresses.  The case can be made both ways.  I've decided I'd like to
add functionality for the latter scenario and let the user decide for
themselves what is best for their particular situation.

[Matthew Dempsky-3]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Mark Johnson <johnsonm@...> wrote:
>  http://danp.net/djbdns/dnscache-1.05-multiple-ip.patch

I don't see any real problems with this patch.  Some nitpicks though:

The code for parsing the IP environment variable seems a little goofy,
but it works.

I'd rather use a flat array of interf objects rather than a linked
list.  You can easily reuse gen_allocdefs.h for this; e.g., see
address_alloc in pickdns-data.c.

The log_listen() log entries seem unnecessary.

[Peter Dambier]

Hello Mark,

thankyou for the patch.

Germany has entered the ring of dns-censoring cults.

A paper is mentioning blocking port 53 for everybody except for
the reichs.dns-server.

It is a paper only and maybe it is only the SciFi highspeed network that
will be ... but you never know.

So querying other ports than 53 might be a good idea and listening
on other ports than 53.


Kind regards
Peter


Mark Johnson wrote:

> I've received a couple requests to add support for dnscache listening
> on multiple IP addresses to zinq-djbdns.  I see this patch available:
>
>   http://danp.net/djbdns/dnscache-1.05-multiple-ip.patch
>
> Thoughts?  Anybody know of any other patches to do this?  I'm not
> trying to start another debate over whether you should run multiple
> instances of dnscache or run one instance listening on multiple
> addresses.  The case can be made both ways.  I've decided I'd like to
> add functionality for the latter scenario and let the user decide for
> themselves what is best for their particular situation.

--
Peter and Karin Dambier
Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana
Rimbacher Strasse 16
D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher
[phone] (Telekom)
[phone] (VoIP: sipgate.de)
mail: peter@...
http://www.peter-dambier.de/
http://iason.site.voila.fr/
https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/
ULA= fd80:4ce1:c66a::/48

[Mark Johnson-21]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:56 PM, Matthew Dempsky <matthew@...> wrote:
> I'd rather use a flat array of interf objects rather than a linked
> list.  You can easily reuse gen_allocdefs.h for this; e.g., see
> address_alloc in pickdns-data.c.

Yeah, that bothered me a bit, too.  Thanks for the tip!

[Dan Peterson-2]

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Mark Johnson <johnsonm@...> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:56 PM, Matthew Dempsky <matthew@...> wrote:
>> I'd rather use a flat array of interf objects rather than a linked
>> list.  You can easily reuse gen_allocdefs.h for this; e.g., see
>> address_alloc in pickdns-data.c.
>
> Yeah, that bothered me a bit, too.  Thanks for the tip!

What can I say? I was young. ;)

-Dan

[chojrak11]

2009/10/17 Mark Johnson <johnsonm@...>:

> I've received a couple requests to add support for dnscache listening
> on multiple IP addresses to zinq-djbdns.  I see this patch available:
>
>  http://danp.net/djbdns/dnscache-1.05-multiple-ip.patch
>
> Thoughts?  Anybody know of any other patches to do this?  I'm not
> trying to start another debate over whether you should run multiple
> instances of dnscache or run one instance listening on multiple
> addresses.  The case can be made both ways.  I've decided I'd like to
> add functionality for the latter scenario and let the user decide for
> themselves what is best for their particular situation.

I remember there were two patches - one for dnscache and the other for
tinydns. The latter was important also. The problem was there were two
different authors, and each of them picked their own delimiter, so
dnscache used 1.2.3.4,5.6.7.8 format and tinydns used for the same
thing 1.2.3.4/5.6.7.8 (or opposite). You could unify this if you'll be
incorporating tinydns patch also.

Thanks.