Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 01:55:31 GMT From: mike@sentex.net (Mike Tancsa) To: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: resolving ips? Message-ID: <360af6b3.248371779@mail.sentex.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSD/.3.91.980924133354.7245A-100000@tetrahome.tetranet.net> References: <Pine.BSD/.3.91.980924133354.7245A-100000@tetrahome.tetranet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 24 Sep 1998 13:52:54 -0500 (CDT), in sentex.lists.freebsd.misc you wrote: > >> >> >> >Why consult the resolver? Why not just make your connection based on the >> >kernel routing tables? >> >> I am not sure what you mean by the routing table in this case.. What you >> are describing is a DNS timeout...If you want it to work faster in this >> situation, then change /etc/host.conf to list hosts first, then bind and >> add the necessary information in your /etc/hosts file. >> > >To clarify the routing table issue, I'll explain what I meant by that. >If I type "telnet 10.1.1.1", I would not expect telnet to consult a DNS >server to do a reverse lookup on that IP. I would expect it to consult >the routing table, decide that 10.1.1.1 was either on a local subnet, >through a remote gateway, or through the default route, and route my TCP >SYN packet accordingly. I am not sure why an application like telnet would want to concern itself with routing.. From what I understand, its the job of the OS / IP Stack to decide how to route the request. When you open a TCP socket, you dont have to specify any sort of routing. Yes, I agree that having the program do any DNS when fed an IP address is rather strange, but I guess the author thought the presentation was more important or something... ---Mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?360af6b3.248371779>