[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] Should we avoid DNS for short names?

To: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Should we avoid DNS for short names?
From: Love Hörnquist Åstrand <lha@kth.se>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 12:40:21 +0200
Cc: Johan Danielsson <joda@pdc.kth.se>, heimdal-discuss@sics.se
In-Reply-To: <1129267749.4450.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> (AndrewBartlett's message of "Fri, 14 Oct 2005 15:29:09 +1000")
References: <1127342844.24016.37.camel@localhost.localdomain><xofy85pxzsa.fsf@shoal.pdc.kth.se><1129267749.4450.2.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: owner-heimdal-discuss@sics.se
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/22.0.50 (darwin)


>> Other than that I don't see any problems. :-)
>> 
>> Wouldn't this be a problem only if you have a non-dns based realm AND
>> you also don't have any local configuration for it (or if the KDC is
>> down)?
>
> It's more about misconfiguration, and our users (or indeed my code)
> blurring the distinction between a netbios domain and a realm.
>
> Attached is another patch to avoid doing a DNS lookup on _kerberos.host
> where 'host' is unqualified.  This was going to the root DNS servers.

What codepaths are causing this to happen for you ?

Love

PGP signature

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Should we avoid DNS for short names?
  - From: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>

References:
- Re: [PATCH] Should we avoid DNS for short names?
  - From: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Should we avoid DNS for short names?
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Should we avoid DNS for short names?
Prev by thread: Re: [PATCH] Should we avoid DNS for short names?
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Should we avoid DNS for short names?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread