feat: dns interceptor #5
Conversation
ronag
force-pushed
the
dns-interceptor
branch
5 times, most recently
from
9d60ded
to
8d01c27
Compare
ronag
force-pushed
the
dns-interceptor
branch
from
8d01c27
to
85fb94d
Compare
| // TODO (fix): What about old "blacklisted" records? | ||
| // TODO (fix): What about ipv6? | ||
|
|
||
| records = await resolve4(hostname, { ttl: true }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if there's no entry in the dnsCache, and multiple requests are made, it will create many concurrent records - possibly an issue?
also perhaps use stale-while-revalidate?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can avsolulety be more optimized. I'll have a look
| const record = records.find((record) => record.expires > now) | ||
|
|
||
| if (!record) { | ||
| return dispatch(opts, handler) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not sure I follow this, it was already checked at top?
|
|
||
| const { protocol, port, hostname, host } = new URL(opts.origin) | ||
|
|
||
| if (net.isIP(hostname) || opts.headers?.host || !port || !protocol) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why skip when headers.host or !port?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should always have port and protocol so I guess I should change that to an asser ot default to http:80.
If a host header is set I'm not sure what kind of weird issues it can cause.
| { | ||
| ...opts, | ||
| origin: `${protocol}//${record.address}:${port}`, | ||
| headers: { ...opts.headers, host }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because otherwise the host header will have the ip instead of the dns name which will cause issues.
No description provided.