[Dnsmasq-discuss] NAPTR support planned?

Simon Kelley simon at thekelleys.org.uk
Mon Jun 16 22:02:18 BST 2008


Johan Bergquist XR wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Simon Kelley [mailto:simon at thekelleys.org.uk] 
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 5:06 PM
>> To: Johan Bergquist XR
>> Cc: dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
>> Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] NAPTR support planned?
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Boy, RFC2915 looks complex! However, as far as I can see, all 
>> the complexity is loaded on the client/resolver. The server 
>> just has to spit out data. Adding support to dnsmasq is simply 
>> a question of adding option-parsing code and something to 
>> add_resource_record() in rfc1035.c.
> 
> Yes, I know, this whole NAPTR / DDDS stuff is kinda complicated to get
> into. But I agree with you that, from dnsmasq's point of view, a
> relatively simple extension would be enough.
> 
>> The only difficulty is deciding if the global utility is owrth 
>> the extra
>> code-size: is NAPTR support likely to be useful to a 
>> reasonable number of people?
> 
> As for the extra code size, I can only speak for myself in that I
> obviously think it's worth it. I also think that NAPTR support will be
> more and more useful in a DNS proxy as more and more clients starts to
> use it for service discovery. My own field is SIP phones, where for
> instance RFC 3263 (SIP: Locating SIP Servers) says that NAPTR should be
> used as one step in figuring out where to send an invite to a given sip:
> URI.
> 
> BR,
> Johan
> 

OK, you convinced me.

http://www.thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/test-releases/dnsmasq-2.43test5.tar.gz

adds --naptr-record

Johan, please could you test it out and let me know if it behaves as 
expected?

Cheers,

Simon.



More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list