> The other reason I wanted to make a DNS client is that I knew I could simplify every step using some great Rust crates
This is one of the reasons I rather like rust and it's ecosystem: you can delegate "boring" functionality (aka the stuff you need, but aren't interested in writing) to the ecosystem and just focus on the stuff you want to.
Other languages also have a similarly rich ecosystem (python in particular). But compared to python, I find that rust is slightly better; 2 reasons come to mind:
* Docs in rust seem to be slightly better. I think this is partly due to the generally high quality of docs.rs, so crate authors seem to have settled on the idea that some minimal baseline docs are expected.
* Error handling in rust feels better. In the python world, I would see None returned some library functions that didn't really document this possibility, yielding an uncomfortable number of runtime TypeErrors or AttributeErrors due to an unexpected NoneType
Pip isn’t suitable for development. Having a global shared package installation doesn’t work if working on separate codebases. It also doesn’t work because you get implicit dev dependencies and then how do you share those when you want to collaborate? Requirements.txt is a laugh for several reasons. Pip-compile and then installing that into a virtualenv is a neat solution that I found. Not sure if there’s anything meaningfully better yet.
I’m not a big Rust user, but my understanding is that Cargo.lock contains checksums. So the answer to your question would be no. Downloading a C++ lib and using Cargo are both effectively trust on first use.
In my experience the Java world tries to look more serious with all dependencies having fancy corporate names, but the end result is exactly the same. Log4j proved to the world that Java has as much of a dependency tree hell problem as any other programming language.
What I find annoying about Java is that very major dependencies are either slow-moving, making upgrading to a new Java version quite a challenge, or require constant rewrites with new releases. I've come to expect that upgrading dependencies usually means "the code works except for these methods being a bit different" but in Java libraries the entire API can change on a whim.
The only thing I find "serious" about it is that everyone seems to run ancient versions of Java because their dependencies are impossible to upgrade. It's no wonder that Java 8 seems to be as popular as ever despite the two LTS releases since.
Nice write–up. I happened to write a little dns client last month too, although I avoided all the low–level protocol stuff and concentrated on the high–level business logic: pull many rows from a database, then create and execute as many queries in parallel as possible.
It’s a good demonstration of why I like Rust so much. All the pieces were already there, and Rust’s type system ensures that I cannot have any unexpected sources of errors. My error–handling code is honestly pretty crude, but the compiler ensures that I have actually handled them all, and that there can be no surprises. No innocent–looking library functions that – surprise! – can actually throw exceptions.
I encourage everyone to write a DNS implementation of some sorts. You quickly learn two things: 1) DNS is pretty simple. 2) handling all the edge cases and bugs in the hundreds of other implementations is not.
I once added ipv6 capabilities to a very old windows software. It turned out that before Windows 8, there was no way to asynchronously resolve an AAAA record in a single threaded app. For the good old A records, you could ask Windows to resolve a hostname and it would send you a window message when it was done.
So after fighting with multithreading in this archane app - I forgot what exactly the problems were - I wrote a very simple resolver that would only be able to handle AAAA lookups. It really is surprisingly simple. I think the more involved part was googling how to retrieve the system's configured DNS servers. ;)
nslookup and host both exist. It’s interesting that the author went straight into a programming challenge rather than looking for another program that may already exist on their system and would solve their dig-hate problem.
The first thing I check for in new DNS code is how the name decompression works, because it is a surprisingly subtle part of the DNS: you have to have a way to stop chasing compression pointers forever, either by limiting the number of pointers you will follow, or by requiring them to point earlier in the message. It is very common to find DNS code that has a denial of service vulnerability in its name decompression; it is one of the best examples of a packet parsing security vulnerability that is not about buffer overflows.
It's a viable strategy. No legitimate implementation produces compression pointers that go anywhere other than backwards. I track the start of a label sequence and whether I've followed a pointer. If I've just followed a pointer, I must be at a point earlier than the last start, or I consider it a malicious name. I also disallow pointers to pointers but I'm less confident that there's not something out there that does that.
So, using () as a marker for the length of a label, and (^name) for a label pointer, how do you handle
()a()b(^b)
The pointer goes backwards, but it doesn't go back to the start of a label sequence. So do you track the start of each label? Or just the start of each domain name?
One thing I noticed while using your code as a reference for a project I worked on several weeks ago is that it doesn't record the state before following the pointer, so unless the pointer you follow eventually leads to another pointer that brings it back to where you were, you can't simulate recursion.
I'm referring to lines 1286-1288 in codec.c, FWIW.
Obviously, you only need to support jumping back per RFC1035 and your code supports both jumping back AND forward, so I'm just telling you this for idle chitchat and so that you know that your code was helpful and I appreciate you putting it out there. Thanks!
Between your code, the one linked to above, and djbdns I was totally confused about what the "right" way is. I eventually read RFC1035 and saw that all of your approaches are correct.
Using recursion didn't even occur to me (and in some places, recursion is verboten, along with memory allocation). As for DJB's comment, while I can agree in general, it seems that the DEFLATE algorithm was documented significantly after DNS (RFC-1950 and RFC-1035).
> and in some places, recursion is verboten, along with memory allocation)
Indeed. This was the case for my project at work.
With that being said, one can always hand-roll recursion with iteration by pushing the state onto their own local stack. I have done this several times on a 6502.
28 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 54.5 ms ] threadThis is one of the reasons I rather like rust and it's ecosystem: you can delegate "boring" functionality (aka the stuff you need, but aren't interested in writing) to the ecosystem and just focus on the stuff you want to.
Other languages also have a similarly rich ecosystem (python in particular). But compared to python, I find that rust is slightly better; 2 reasons come to mind:
* Docs in rust seem to be slightly better. I think this is partly due to the generally high quality of docs.rs, so crate authors seem to have settled on the idea that some minimal baseline docs are expected.
* Error handling in rust feels better. In the python world, I would see None returned some library functions that didn't really document this possibility, yielding an uncomfortable number of runtime TypeErrors or AttributeErrors due to an unexpected NoneType
What I find annoying about Java is that very major dependencies are either slow-moving, making upgrading to a new Java version quite a challenge, or require constant rewrites with new releases. I've come to expect that upgrading dependencies usually means "the code works except for these methods being a bit different" but in Java libraries the entire API can change on a whim.
The only thing I find "serious" about it is that everyone seems to run ancient versions of Java because their dependencies are impossible to upgrade. It's no wonder that Java 8 seems to be as popular as ever despite the two LTS releases since.
It’s a good demonstration of why I like Rust so much. All the pieces were already there, and Rust’s type system ensures that I cannot have any unexpected sources of errors. My error–handling code is honestly pretty crude, but the compiler ensures that I have actually handled them all, and that there can be no surprises. No innocent–looking library functions that – surprise! – can actually throw exceptions.
The differences:
I followed this guide rather than the RFCs https://github.com/EmilHernvall/dnsguide/blob/master/chapter...
Mine isn't as polished. The command line parsing and output is more thrown together.
I hardcoded the packet identifier (it's not production code, and I'm only looking up one at a time).
I didn't use any bit manipulation libraries. I can see they would help because DNS packets don't line up their information with the byte boundaries.
So after fighting with multithreading in this archane app - I forgot what exactly the problems were - I wrote a very simple resolver that would only be able to handle AAAA lookups. It really is surprisingly simple. I think the more involved part was googling how to retrieve the system's configured DNS servers. ;)
[1] https://github.com/spc476/SPCDNS
Edit: nevermind, I see what you are doing.
I'm referring to lines 1286-1288 in codec.c, FWIW.
Obviously, you only need to support jumping back per RFC1035 and your code supports both jumping back AND forward, so I'm just telling you this for idle chitchat and so that you know that your code was helpful and I appreciate you putting it out there. Thanks!
Edit: Also, before I forget, this implementation uses recursion even though it's not necessary. https://github.com/google/gopacket/blob/3eaba08943250fd21252...
Between your code, the one linked to above, and djbdns I was totally confused about what the "right" way is. I eventually read RFC1035 and saw that all of your approaches are correct.
Edit 2: Also, DJB has some choice words about the compression scheme. https://github.com/abh/djbdns/blob/0715ca5de14ad5eae2c779c53...
Using recursion didn't even occur to me (and in some places, recursion is verboten, along with memory allocation). As for DJB's comment, while I can agree in general, it seems that the DEFLATE algorithm was documented significantly after DNS (RFC-1950 and RFC-1035).
Indeed. This was the case for my project at work.
With that being said, one can always hand-roll recursion with iteration by pushing the state onto their own local stack. I have done this several times on a 6502.