It's definitely bug in Windows XP SP1, as it was supposed by Roland
Postle <[email protected]> To reproduce it:
1. Created zone 1.168.192.in-addr.arpa and add record:
254 IN CNAME non.existant.name
2. Use test program attached
3. I did tests on Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000 and Windows XP SP1.
Windows NT 4.0:
Windows XP SP1:
So, this problem is not specific to mIRC and it's possible to crash any
application on Windows XP Sp1 where gethostbyaddr() or
WSAAsyncGetHostByAddr() is used for reverse name resolution (IRC
clients, Peer-to-Peer clients, personal firewalls, etc).
Can somebody test Windows 2003?
--Thursday, May 29, 2003, 11:52:59 AM, you wrote to [email protected]:
3> Dear Peter Pentchev,
3> A way to delegate reverse resolution for network less than /24 is
3> defined in RFC 2317. And it's different from one used.
3> But you're right: the problem is probably not in unresolvable PTR. The
3> problem is in unresolvable CNAME instead of PTR, so PTR is never found
3> at all. And yes: it may affect different applications where
3> gethostbyname() is used. I will test gethostbyname() behavior for this
3> case in Windows and Unix and report back.
3> --Thursday, May 29, 2003, 11:26:04 AM, you wrote to [email protected]:
PP>> On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 02:45:25PM +0400, 3APA3A wrote:
>>> Dear Davide Del Vecchio,
>>> Currently 22.214.171.124 doesn't resolve. But during original test it had
>>> flowed PTR record:
>>> bash-2.03$ host 126.96.36.199
>>> 188.8.131.52.IN-ADDR.ARPA is a nickname for 184.108.40.206.210.IN-ADDR.ARPA
>>> (.16 is twice)
PP>> This is not necessarily a flawed record; I believe it might be as simple
PP>> as the ultimate in classless reverse DNS delegation. Note that the
PP>> 16.193.210.in-addr.arpa zone is delegated to ns.qala.com.sg, while
PP>> this specific "alias" subdelegates the reverse DNS records for
PP>> 220.127.116.11 to dns.lga.net.sg.
Машина оказалась способной к единственному действию,
а именно умножению 2x2, да и то при этом ошибаясь. (Лем)