Hi Andrey, >>>> why do we have to spawn threads or do forks for DNS. This looks all >>>> pretty expensive. In ConnMan for example we just wrote our own async >>>> DNS using a mainloop. Works perfectly fine and is dirt cheap. >>> >>> Well, we don't fork threads/processes for each call but reuse them. >>> >>> What libasyncns does what your solution doesn't do is go via NSS. This >>> means /etc/hosts, nss-myhostname, nss-ldap, nss-mdns and so on just >>> work, while that all is lost when doing DNS natively. >>> >>> I am pretty sure we should not bypass NSS for this. >> >> actually NSS for DNS is pretty nasty stuff. I am pretty sure we should >> bypass it and create a proper implementation. Is anybody actually using NIS >> or LDAP for domain name resolution? >> > > Yes, there are solutions that are using LDAP for hostname resolution > quite heavily - actually are based around LDAP without any > local /etc/hosts.
that is extremely heavy and must suck form a latency point of view. Then again, nothing that a DNS<->LDAP bridge couldn’t easily support. Since dragging LDAP dependencies into every program that has to load NSS modules is not a good idea either. Regards Marcel _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
