[Pdns-users] PowerDNS needs your thoughts on two important DNSSEC matters

Peter van Dijk peter.van.dijk at netherlabs.nl
Mon Sep 3 19:25:58 UTC 2012

Hello Seth,

On Sep 3, 2012, at 19:54 , Seth Mattinen wrote:

>> 1b. Is VARBINARY the best way to do it for MySQL?
> Yes. A similar issue was seen in sql-based bayes databases for
> SpamAssassin tokens and the solution is to use BINARY for the token col
> instead of CHAR. Generic fixes are best.

Agreed. Always good to hear from experience :)

>> 2b. Do you think type=NULL (SQL NULL) is an ugly hack? If so, what else should we do?
> If it's internal-only and handled automatically by rectify-zone it makes
> sense to not have a type and that it would be null. External management
> tools can be easily modified to ignore rows were type is null.

Yes, agreed.

>> 2c. If we accept type=NULL as an acceptable notation, should we still have this extra field just to make cleanup easier?
> A 'virt' flag wold be more future-proof if in the future virtual records
> needed a type for some currently unforeseen reason. Management tools can
> likewise ignore 'virt=true' records.

If they have a type, they're not virtual - as far as I can tell for now. I also don't foresee many more changes to the fundamentals of DNS, after DNSSEC. We will ponder it some more...

Kind regards,
Peter van Dijk
Netherlabs Computer Consulting BV - http://www.netherlabs.nl/

More information about the Pdns-users mailing list