Evgeny Vereshchagin

Just to clarify I'm not saying that tests should be necessarily added in this PR. What I'm saying is that personally I didn't have the time to review this PR...

> Should we instead to ignore CNAME completely? I don't think CNAMEs should be ignored completely. They should be handled properly though. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6762#section-16 explicitly mentions one use case > Where...

OSS-Fuzz says the issue is gone: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=42044. Closing. The other OSS-Fuzz issues should hopefully be closed automatically.

I can't seem to trigger this issue anymore using this particular test case so I'll go ahead and close it. Now that OSS-Fuzz more or less can open and close...

I can't seem to reproduce it on x86_64 either. Looks like it can be reproduced in the "32-bit" OSS-Fuzz containers (where `libbpf` is compiled with `-m32`) so it seems it...

Thanks to https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=40868#c5 I realized that this issue was fixed. Closing. @shunghsiyu I'm not sure why exactly it was reported so many times and closed as verified before it was...

I think it was just a glitch of some kind. I also closed the OSV issues in https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz-vulns/pull/25 so at least all the links the CVEs point to should be...

subtypes don't seem to be advertised anywhere: ``` 12:12:14.442667 IP H.mdns > mdns.mcast.net.mdns: 0 [2q] [3n] ANY (QM)? H.local. ANY (QM)? H._qotd._tcp.local. (100) 12:12:14.743995 IP H.mdns > mdns.mcast.net.mdns: 0 [2q]...

Got it. It's just that I thought that this PR was on its way to the main branch so I decided to chime in :-) > I don't really care...

> We need some special handling for these anyway, since we need to advertise a PTR from the selective name with subtype to the usual name without a subtype. Agreed....