On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Jamie Lokier wrote:

>> I must admit I'm a looser for portable code and solutions in general, but I
>> want to stress that I don't want to see this threaded approach done in
>> other operating systems. I want to push people not happy with the default
>> resolves go the c-ares route instead, and if that isn't good enough we fix
>> c-ares to become good enough...
>
> Why would c-ares be fine for other operating systems but not good enough for
> Windows?

Just some bad wording on my behalf. c-ares already works fine on Windows too,
but we already have the threaded resolver for windows and thus I think we can
keep it. I just think that the correct evolution is towards more c-ares, not
more threading.

> The OP mentioned needing to resolve Windows local domain suffixes, but other
> OSes also have local name resolution rules. Doesn't that mean c-ares needs
> to support those for the same reasons? For example, *.local does Multicast
> DNS on some systems. (Maybe that's even what the Windows requirement was
> about?)

Right, it means that c-ares need to have support for all the magic the "native
resolver" does. I bet it doesn't yet.

-- 
  / daniel.haxx.se