Re: [Doh] gethostbyname?

[Erik Kline <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 15:20, 神明達哉 <[e-mail]> wrote:

> At Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:26:49 -0400,
> Ben Schwartz <bemasc=[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > Please avoid casting aspersions on other working group participants, even
> > in jest, as it might be misconstrued and cause offense.
>
> Perhaps the wording wasn't very appropriate, but I think it's
> generally a good practice to have any IETF work assume the use of
> IPv6.  It's also consistent with the overall trend to IPv6-awareness
> in the IETF, e.g., as described in
> https://www.iab.org/2016/11/07/iab-statement-on-ipv6/
>
> The actual draft text doesn't seem to be so problematic in that sense:
>
>    Browsers which cannot get the IP address(es) of the resolver
>    configured by the operating system using APIs are still able to use
>    an operating system function such as gethostbyname() or its
>    equivalents to convert host names into IP addresses through the stub
>    resolver in the operating system on which they are running.
>
> since it only refers to gethostbyname() as an example and also says
> "or its equivalents", and I also don't think the author lives in the
> previous century given that he was involved in the development of a
> modern DNS library; but I don't think changing gethostbyname() to
> getaddrinfo() (or at least gethostbyname2()) doesn't do any harm
> either, if it's not an improvement.  I've just sent a pull request for
> this change on github:
> https://github.com/dohwg/draft-ietf-doh-resolver-associated-doh/pull/6
>
>
You could even add a reference to rfc3493#section-6.1, I would think.