From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>
To: development@lists.ipfire.org
Subject: Re: unbound 1.15.0 - problems with certain DoT(?) configurations
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 09:36:10 +0000
Message-ID: <BB90C5E9-09B6-4278-9F67-87D0A9D096D6@ipfire.org>
In-Reply-To: <a1530bff-5130-5ab9-81e5-6cb6654c1690@ipfire.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8089810317401654967=="
List-Id: <development.lists.ipfire.org>

--===============8089810317401654967==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Matthias,

Yes, we should definitely wait before we introduce a known regression.

I do not see anything on the change log that would be *that* interesting for =
us that it would be worth it to break DoT.

Hopefully a patch will be available soon.

-Michael

> On 11 Feb 2022, at 08:58, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> =
wrote:
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> please note - I'm working on 'unbound 1.15.0' which was published
> yesterday, but it seems this version has some problems with DoT(?).
>=20
> See:
> =3D>
> https://lists.nlnetlabs.nl/pipermail/unbound-users/2022-February/007669.html
>=20
> "It looks like with certain (dot?) configuration, 53/tcp becomes defunct
> on this version of unbound".
>=20
> I'm testing - no problems so far - under MY environment (see attached
> screenshot).
>=20
> Should we still wait?
>=20
> =3D> Opinions!?
>=20
> Best,
> Matthias<screenshot_dns_gui.png>


--===============8089810317401654967==--