[DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer section of a DNS response
Ángel <angel@16bits.net> Tue, 20 January 2026 00:54 UTC
Return-Path: <angel@16bits.net>
X-Original-To: dnsop@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: dnsop@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E12BAA279E0 for <dnsop@mail2.ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jan 2026 16:54:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=16bits.net header.b="7Fq3M7Cy"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=16bits.net header.b="RK7us5tT"
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sz7v0ZlXv83b for <dnsop@mail2.ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jan 2026 16:54:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.direccionemail.com (mail.direccionemail.com [198.23.137.135]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48FA2AA2791E for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jan 2026 16:54:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=16bits.net; s=ec2601; t=1768870454; bh=25WWM0/ZYe22U99nTbQZ4UHK8ulBsSHnWotT3Bjgla0=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; b=7Fq3M7CyGNyN+F+REZygkbRWqEaGNzQVXXZFc491Xvgkl/3mEs8sn7pRZnuIiEtv/ U6wrl0llCgRQ9duLPzlCQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=16bits.net; s=rsa2601; t=1768870454; bh=25WWM0/ZYe22U99nTbQZ4UHK8ulBsSHnWotT3Bjgla0=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; b=RK7us5tTkbzdeqGJE2oZdmWu0xtPfA30ZtlXP/wKhpBCbAZcl4BhxUzNAJkinw4+F g/pQiv8g0dIRq02vJ/I53cYuuxzC156aJZxg4sBSLv7M198Jhmf6MgB1Lj2K7lPNts c4g3IKJuS+mCV/4JIyUSvzeQvr5sJJH7ZRbofMlDZJJLGtoMvdXhKZE8E0W27Br3or ToSqo288K/w5ErwrRpVfmOOdtB5xGCU2izK8tKHAMXQxq2ucHsmOnCj7QwLkAvAm34 aByK5zJnjNVIsIDszzYpdiYv5fXFfjaO0PBAK1P/fEE7fJytOKRTCQSNsooEm7guFd f+nQABwhdnVdQ==
Message-ID: <e9211bda891014b99e7f96f2701519c5d2ed9649.camel@16bits.net>
From: Ángel <angel@16bits.net>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 01:54:13 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20260119195624.88683F1F4E6C@ary.qy>
References: <9175DF63-77F9-4B4C-9EA9-76B30F941F84@strandkip.nl> <e48c41c3-86cf-4e1f-a9ab-195426bdea17@nic.cz> <20260115022930.C70F4F11E0CD@ary.qy> <877bth4z9c.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <b07a269a-ed1b-8bed-8d99-52619f4f5e14@taugh.com> <4eb218ddcca68f3a7c1272bfc0ff0c3e398b207b.camel@16bits.net> <20260119195624.88683F1F4E6C@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID-Hash: 2W6ESXEOPA6UD2NTHAY4JGBVBQB4YLKO
X-Message-ID-Hash: 2W6ESXEOPA6UD2NTHAY4JGBVBQB4YLKO
X-MailFrom: angel@16bits.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dnsop.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer section of a DNS response
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/ReiiEOcGinaSUFU_X2t_5h6nlao>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dnsop-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dnsop-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dnsop-leave@ietf.org>
On 2026-01-19 at 14:56 -0500, John Levine wrote: > It appears that ngel <angel@16bits.net> said: > > Note that gethostbyname(3), returns the list of alias, so it needs > > to > > process the CNAMEs. > > High-level programs generally don't need them, though, ... > > I wrote a little test program that prints out the answers from > gethostbyname() and found it provides a list of CNAMEs, but not the > final name with the A record, You are probably missing h_name: $ ./gethostbyname info.whois.services.net name: whois.identitydigital.gtm.iddg.io aliases: - info.whois.services.net - whois.nic.info - whois.identitydigital.services addrtype: IPv4 length: 4 addresses: - 52.37.99.5
- [DNSOP] ordering of RRSets in the answer section … Joe Abley
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Petr Špaček
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Robert Edmonds
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Paul Wouters
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Robert Edmonds
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Peter Thomassen
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Petr Špaček
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Petr Špaček
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Joe Abley
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Florian Weimer
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Joe Abley
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Florian Weimer
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Dave Lawrence
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Florian Weimer
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Mark Andrews
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Libor Peltan
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Warren Kumari
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Philip Homburg
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Ondřej Surý
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Paul Wouters
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… John Levine
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Manu Bretelle
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Joe Abley
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Manu Bretelle
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Florian Weimer
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Philip Homburg
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Petr Špaček
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Philip Homburg
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Mark Andrews
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Philip Homburg
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Mark Andrews
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Philip Homburg
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… John R Levine
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Ángel
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… John Levine
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Florian Weimer
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Ángel
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Joe Abley
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Libor Peltan
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Kevin P. Fleming
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Joe Abley
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Ondřej Surý
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Ángel
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Joe Abley
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… John Levine
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Ángel
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… X L
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Mark Andrews
- [DNSOP] Re: ordering of RRSets in the answer sect… Paul Wouters