Suggestion: Removal of BIND from base / Import alternative DNS Library ldns / import dig replacement drill

Jan Lentfer Jan.Lentfer at
Tue Mar 9 22:02:19 PST 2010

Chris Turner schrieb:
Jan Lentfer wrote:
> This made it necessary to also import the alternative DNS Library ldns
> (in which drill is included). In a second step ldns could also give us
> the opportunity to also make libc independent for BINDs resolver as it
> should provides it'S own resolver library. I guess all that needs to be
> done is to interface the res_* stuff from BIND to ldns.
Don't know anything about this library, save from what I could grok 
from a quick look.. what's the advantage of using it, instead of just 
out the minimum to support client lookups + userland from the ISC code?

That is what I did for now. The resolver stuff necessary for libc from 
BIND was moved into lib/libc/resolv lib/libc/nameser and so on. 
Replacing the resolver with ldns would be a possible second (or 3rd 
or..) step I'd like to discuss to be entirely independent of BIND's code 
base - of course by introducing another dependency elsewhere. From what 
I have heard this is the way OpenBSD is going (irc rumours).
ldns seems more lightweight and it is *just* a DNS library - whereas 
BIND's libresolv is not a standalone library but comes bundled with BIND 

(e.g. doesn't this just substitute one lesser known 3rd party software 
in contrib for another one, embedded into libc)

Well, it doesn't atm, because it is not part of this patch-set :-).
But that is exactly what has to be discussed in the future. At the 
moment ldns is only use for drill (the dig replacement) in my patch-set, 
nothing else. But I think (someone else with a lot more knowledge about 
libc and resolver stuff has to verify this) it would open the door for 
us to switch the resolver part of our libc to ldns from BIND.



More information about the Submit mailing list