Re: DNS bug, or is it my config in 2.3Stable1

On Mon, 31 Jan 2000, Clifton Royston wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 31, 2000 at 01:38:10AM +0100, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> > Geoff Nordli wrote:
> > > I am running 2.3 Stable1 on Redhat 6.1. It seems that
> > > it doesn't like the address of 0.0.0.0 in the resolv.conf
> > > file.
> >
> > > WARNING: Reply from unknown nameserver [127.0.0.1]
> >
> > 0.0.0.0 is a broadcast address. Broadcasts does not fit well with Suqids
> > requirement that the DNS reply comes from a DNS server (and query) it
> > has explicitly asked.
>
> It's an archaism from some ancient ancient version of SunOS which is
> backwards supported by many name resolver implementations, for
> historical reasons. I think modern name resolvers, if they support it,
> treat it as a special case and equivalent to 127.0.0.1, though I
> haven't looked at the code.

Except for SunOS and Solaris, the interpretation of 0.0.0.0 as a broadcast
address was corrected long ago. The correct interpretation of 0.0.0.0 is
"this host". On systems that have incorporated the BSD 4.4 networking
code, specifying 0.0.0.0 is significantly faster than using 127.0.0.1
which may be one of hundreds of IP addresses assigned to /dev/lo0 in a
virtual hosting environment.

Using 0.0.0.0 in a Squid 1.1.22 environment has not been a problem. I am
just migrating systems over to Squid 2.2.5 and may discover that there is
a problem.

Merton Campbell Crockett
Received on Mon Jan 31 2000 - 12:11:31 MST