[bind10-dev] DNS message API: the message class

[Jelte Jansen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
>> My personal feeling is that RRDATA instead of RDATA would convey the
>> contents better, in this approach, since we're talking about all the
>> data of the rrs. But loud screaming of 'for the love of <my deity>,
>> NO', or other suggestions are welcome
> 
> Hmm...I personally don't have a strong preference (I just followed the
> naming convention of BIND9 and dnspython), but "RDATA" is the standard
> technical term defined in RFC1035 so it sounds reasonable to me.
> 

Well if I'm the only one who thinks of 1 specific rdata field when seeing the
name 'rdata' i'll shut up now :)

> As for RdataClass and RdataType, on the other hand, RRClass and RRType
> are probably better because class/type are attributes (fields) of an
> RR, not of an RDATA.  Do you feel more comfortable with RRClass and
> RRType, or would you seek something even better?
> 

yes.

Jelte
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkrO+CIACgkQ4nZCKsdOncUA7ACgxpliYwomEYaJKmSssCHCynWw
8GQAn0eIjQtbKX1OjIa+THkVgDb+kfn6
=jswr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----