To:
bert hubert <ahu@ds9a.nl>
Cc:
dnsop@cafax.se
From:
Ed Sawicki <ed@alcpress.com>
Date:
20 Feb 2003 13:56:19 -0800
In-Reply-To:
<20030220211400.GA14720@outpost.ds9a.nl>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: Why one port?
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 13:14, bert hubert wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:03:15AM -0800, Ed Sawicki wrote: > > I'm wondering why there is only one UDP port assigned to the DNS > > protocol? It prevents us from using both an iterative name > > server and a recursive name server/cache on the same computer > > when only one IP address is available. > > Well, that is partly due to the wording of 1034 and 1035 which pretty much > mention 'local cache' and 'local database' in one breath. > > And indeed, this is a big mistake. Right now, you can't even differentiate > based on the RD bit. Compare it to running Squid and Apache both on port 80. > > Regards, > > bert Shouldn't we try to fix it? -- Ed Sawicki <ed@alcpress.com> ALC #---------------------------------------------------------------------- # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.