William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Mads Toftum wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 09:30:30AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I propose mod_domain.... to match the IANA port number
assignment.
Seems more confusing than mod_named.
I didn't care for mod_named (we haven't been suffixing the 'd'aemon
most of the time), was actually thinking of mod_cname or similar, but
mod_domain looks suitably unique and descriptive.
+1 to mod_domain from me.
Fair warning to everyone (just FYI while we're talking about the name):
The module is itself modular, with only "core" DNS recordtypes built-in
- at the moment, that's A, CNAME and MX and will probably include at
least SOA and NS too before a version 1 is released. So we're
potentially going to see modules like mod_domain_mx and mod_domain_txt
or mod_domain_msad (for active directory extensions), etc.
Also, do we want to change the internals to start using the new name or
not - most notably the public bits of the API that are there to allow
extensibility, like DNS_DECLARE(type), DNS_DECLARE_NONSTD(type) and
DNS_DECLARE_DATA macros, etc?
Issac
Issac
