hjV9H2bWu4ZhXPy

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by hjV9H2bWu4ZhXPy 4y ago

   You are arguing against facts that I have already clearly demonstrated. Get out Wireshark and test. Once again, mistakes made by an application-layer program (or spec!) do not invalidate the facts of underlying layers. The hostname will
2. 2.▲
   by hjV9H2bWu4ZhXPy 4y ago

   > It is not a textual match, and this is observable at multiple points in the process. It is therefore a different hostname. It’s that simple. Except that it is, in fact, the same hostname. "It's that simple." This is defi
3. 3.▲
   by hjV9H2bWu4ZhXPy 4y ago

   Nope, that's definitely the same hostname, and will always resolve to the same IP address, barring some real weirdness (someone's system applying the search domain to a domain that already contains dots, and then actually finding
4. 4.▲
   by hjV9H2bWu4ZhXPy 4y ago

   Does a lookup for "ai." work without it? That is (explicitly, even!) a FQDN...
5. 5.▲
   by hjV9H2bWu4ZhXPy 4y ago

   > As recommended by IETF standards track RFCs, existing deployed systems apply a search list to single-label names prior to attempting to resolve them. Note that it says "prior to" rather than "instead of". This is a