Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:77319
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.194 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <450d2cb6-d53c-4a0a-b9c0-e6a97ce7bc27@email.android.com>
References: <CAA8DMBtdzrkkuXyYqQwnK8DxLB0RoN_y_Hz7+A2SgKmaNaWW=w@mail.gmail.com>
	<4bf4c18f-173d-45c9-a7e8-344f5ebcb47f@email.android.com>
	<450d2cb6-d53c-4a0a-b9c0-e6a97ce7bc27@email.android.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 17:47:36 -0400
Message-ID: <CAA8DMBuMBao_8Teixxcg10BRtx9W=WMJ_+EjFRKkZQNYh=R3xw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rowan Collins <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04430466c2a31505035deee9
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Why does checkdnsrr() default to MX??
From: figureonecpr@gmail.com (Sanford Whiteman)

--f46d04430466c2a31505035deee9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I was just composing an e-mail advising you to follow general netiquette
rules and read the original post. :)

I disagree utterly that I did not sufficiently address the question. I
addressed it in multiple ways:

[1] ANY queries create extraneous traffic, so you want fewer PHP functions
defaulting to them, not more;

[2] ANY queries may fail, giving a false negative, when individual RRs
would succeed;

[3] An ANY query that only reduces to a *boolean *is a particular waste of
energy and network traffic if you're trying to see whether a domain has any
records, as you can use SOA for that, with no loss of fidelity;

[4] *if* checkdnsrr() is generalized from dns_get_mx() that is another
explanation

I think [4] is actually my weakest point.

-- S.

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 18 September 2014 22:19:46 GMT+01:00, Rowan Collins <
> rowan.collins@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >I hope this message doesn't sound too negative, and look forward to
> >clarification of your thoughts.
> >
> >
>
>
> Apologies, I've just realised that that message wasn't in fact the
> beginning of the thread, so some of my comments are way off base.
>
> Out of context, it looked like a bit of a rant about how ANY could never
> be a useful option. Still, the only line that really addressed the question
> was this:
>
> > I don't think there's anything askew in MX being the
> default
> for checkdnsrr() if you think of it as a cut-down generalization of
> checkdmsmx()
>
> (Sorry, that's not a direct quote because I'm having copy and paste
> issues.)
>
> Sorry again for the misunderstanding.
> --
>  Rowan

--f46d04430466c2a31505035deee9--