[Dnsmasq-discuss] dnsmasq and sshfp records

Gerd Koenig koenig.bodensee at googlemail.com
Sun May 27 20:20:39 BST 2012


On 25 May 2012 16:11, Simon Kelley <simon at thekelleys.org.uk> wrote:

> On 25/05/12 12:14, Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
> >> relaxing the hex parsing to make colons and leading zeros optional gets
> >> the possibility of something that's almost an natural encoding in this
> >> case, and may be generally useful if less easy to use.
> >>
> >> dns-rr=44,2:1:123456789abcdef67890123456789abcdef67890
> >>
> >> Opinions?
> >
> > Go for it!
> >
> > I recommend reading RFC 3597, Section 5 on the text-representation of
> > arbitrary DNS RR types, and if possible lean towards that, making lives
> > of people who copy paste RDATA easier. :)
> >
> I'll support that as well.
> Cheers,
> Simon.

I like the approach of supporting arbitrary RR types, since it is a very
flexible, future oriented solution and it covers my original question also
After some investigation it pointed out that using DNSSEC would be a bit
too much overhead because we are inside a secure network (just as a
feedback to JP).

How is the workflow for adding a new functionality, some kind of rules for
working @dnsmasq source ?!?!
I'm not a C guru, but I'd like to contribute as much as I can to speed up
the implementation of supporting arbitrary RR types......immediately after
my Corpus Christi vacation ;-) ....

br Gerd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/attachments/20120527/08ea1887/attachment.html>

More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list