News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Musl 1.2.4 adds TCP DNS fallback by yjftsjthsd-h on Sunday July 30, 2023 @05:10PM (#36936007)
> The cloak of standards compliant could no longer be used

Or in other words they've always been standards-compliant, and when the standard changed they updated to match it.

Re:Musl 1.2.4 adds TCP DNS fallback by fanf2 on Sunday July 30, 2023 @06:08PM (#36936502)
TCP support has been MUST implement for stub resolvers since 2016, so musl is several years late https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7766#page-6
Re:Musl 1.2.4 adds TCP DNS fallback by yjftsjthsd-h on Monday July 31, 2023 @01:40AM (#36939164)
Okay, then they haven't been standards-compliant for a very long time, which is a much more compelling point than arguing that they should be doing things beyond the standard.
Re:Musl 1.2.4 adds TCP DNS fallback by fanf2 on Monday July 31, 2023 @03:17AM (#36939640)
The reason the DNS TCP requirements RFCs were written was because of boneheads who don’t believe people who tell them it has been a non-optional part of the protocol since the 1980s
Re:Musl 1.2.4 adds TCP DNS fallback by geocar on Monday July 31, 2023 @08:39AM (#36941717)
You are mistaken. That is only a proposal to change the standard.

https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/#allstds

https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards

Re:Musl 1.2.4 adds TCP DNS fallback by m3047 on Monday July 31, 2023 @12:30PM (#36945105)
"It's a catastrophe, but of little importance" -- Zizek

"RFC" is Request For Comments. Some RFCs become standards. But there are no internet police, notwithstanding that the internet is a fascist state (run by corporations for the benefit of corporations). Understanding it as a fascist state is the rational way to view "enforcement" as well as the natterings over whether something is a standard and who is going to enforce it anyway.