Hello!
Does nsd support ALIAS records or is there a plan to support it somewhen in the future? I didn’t find anything about this topic in conjunction with nsd. Afaik there is no RFC for it and I guess therefore nsd does not support it.
PowerDNS does for example: https://doc.powerdns.com/authoritative/guides/alias.html
Br,
Christof
Hi Christof!
AFAIK, PowerDNS is the only open source name server that supports ALIAS. There was an idea to standardize ALIAS as "ANAME" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-aname/), but the idea was dropped in favor of SVCB/HTTPS record https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9460/. So now we have to wait until all Browser vendors implement SVCB/HTTPS.
Regards
Klaus
PS: If you build something new, don't use ALIAS, it can cause you problems later due to incompatibilities
While SVCB/HTTPS provides a better solution for the browsing use case, I see other use cases where ALIAS/ANAME would be ideal, notably in apex RRs.
So while fostering SVCB/HTTPS deployment is a good thing, I wouldn’t mind name server software implementing ALIAS. Including NSD, but I reckon it’s much more challenging to do due to NSD architecture than it was to implement it in PowerDNS.
But if NSD developers some day feel bored, perhaps implementing ALIAS would solve that ? 
Rubens
Rubens
While SVCB/HTTPS provides a better solution for the browsing use case, I see other use cases where ALIAS/ANAME would be ideal, notably in apex RRs.
The HTTPS RR Type was specifically added to address the apex RR issue. In fact, when the whole SVCB idea first came up, there was one annoying DNSOP co-chair who was adamant that their solutions address the apex case, as it was the biggest non-standard thing. It’s not a 100% replacement, but it is fairly close.
I include an image of a slide which was presented by the SVCB authors on the pros/cons between SVCB and ANAME (aka ALIAS) from an IETF long since past.
thanks
tim
