On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 11:22 +0200, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 11:22 -0500, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
> > On 9/20/2011 6:15 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> > >>> ACK. Proposal looks like it will work fairly easily with the UI.
> > >>> We'll have to make some chagnes due to the Add doing s
Martin Kosek wrote:
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 11:22 +0200, Martin Kosek wrote:
On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 11:22 -0500, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
On 9/20/2011 6:15 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
ACK. Proposal looks like it will work fairly easily with the UI.
We'll have to make some chagnes due to the Add doin
On 9/22/2011 7:24 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
2) Some DNS records may be pretty large. MX record data is small, but
for example CERT records have an entire certificate stored in it.
Wouldn't there be a problem if we place the large DNS record in URL?
This is how the DNS record list page could be re
On 09/22/2011 08:31 PM, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
On 9/22/2011 7:24 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
2) Some DNS records may be pretty large. MX record data is small, but
for example CERT records have an entire certificate stored in it.
Wouldn't there be a problem if we place the large DNS record in URL?
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 19:31 -0500, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
> On 9/22/2011 7:24 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >> 2) Some DNS records may be pretty large. MX record data is small, but
> >> for example CERT records have an entire certificate stored in it.
> >> Wouldn't there be a problem if we place the
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:05 -0400, Adam Young wrote:
> On 09/22/2011 08:31 PM, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
> >> OPEN QUESTION: should we implement these new commands also for discrete
> >> DNS records types to be consistent? I mean for example A, , CNAME,
> >> PTR, ... They would look like
> >>
>
On 09/23/2011 02:02 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:05 -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 09/22/2011 08:31 PM, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
OPEN QUESTION: should we implement these new commands also for discrete
DNS records types to be consistent? I mean for example A, , CNAME,
PTR, .
On 09/23/2011 02:02 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:05 -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 09/22/2011 08:31 PM, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
OPEN QUESTION: should we implement these new commands also for discrete
DNS records types to be consistent? I mean for example A, , CNAME,
PTR, .
On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 10:46 -0400, Adam Young wrote:
> On 09/23/2011 02:02 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:05 -0400, Adam Young wrote:
> >> On 09/22/2011 08:31 PM, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
> OPEN QUESTION: should we implement these new commands also for discrete
> DNS
Adam Young wrote:
On 09/23/2011 02:02 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:05 -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 09/22/2011 08:31 PM, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
OPEN QUESTION: should we implement these new commands also for
discrete
DNS records types to be consistent? I mean for example A,
On 09/23/2011 11:52 AM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Adam Young wrote:
On 09/23/2011 02:02 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:05 -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 09/22/2011 08:31 PM, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
OPEN QUESTION: should we implement these new commands also for
discrete
DNS records
On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 13:17 -0400, Adam Young wrote:
> On 09/23/2011 11:52 AM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> > Adam Young wrote:
> >> On 09/23/2011 02:02 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:05 -0400, Adam Young wrote:
> On 09/22/2011 08:31 PM, Endi Sukma Dewata wrote:
> >> OPE
12 matches
Mail list logo
