Re: DNS bug, or is it my config in 2.3Stable1

Merton Campbell Crockett wrote:

> Except for SunOS and Solaris, the interpretation of 0.0.0.0 as a broadcast
> address was corrected long ago. The correct interpretation of 0.0.0.0 is
> "this host".

Says who?

* Havent seen this in any RFC, only references to 0.0.0.0 being an
obsolete limited broadcast address.
* It is not mentioned in SUSv2 from what I can tell..

> On systems that have incorporated the BSD 4.4 networking
> code, specifying 0.0.0.0 is significantly faster than using 127.0.0.1
> which may be one of hundreds of IP addresses assigned to /dev/lo0 in a
> virtual hosting environment.

That is another issue. 0.0.0.0 is obsolete and local implementations may
use it in any way they wish. The only problem I am actually having with
this practise is that the return packets are from 127.0.0.1, not
0.0.0.0.

> Using 0.0.0.0 in a Squid 1.1.22 environment has not been a problem. I am
> just migrating systems over to Squid 2.2.5 and may discover that there is
> a problem.

It will only become a problem when you switch to Squid-2.3 or later
(unless Squid is hacked to recognise this).

--
Henrik Nordstrom
Squid hacker