search

libdns / digitalocean

MIT License
10 stars 15 forks source link

Relative/absolute record name conversions #6

Closed mholt closed 2 years ago

mholt commented 3 years ago

Hi,

Over in the libdns repo, we're discussing standardizing the use of relative or absolute record names in libdns.Record structs. The current consensus is that they should be made relative (i.e. for a record named sub.example.com in a zone called example.com, the name should become sub). This may affect your provider implementation.

When you have a chance, would you please check out this issue? This is the last call for feedback before we decide and I push the changes.

Link: https://github.com/libdns/libdns/issues/12#issuecomment-756135908

Thank you!

GurjinderSingh commented 3 years ago

please update this, i was going to report.

current result for me is this :crying_cat_face: 

_acme-challenge.sub.example.com.example.com

https://github.com/libdns/digitalocean/blob/186c4ebd22152458b6ad018238dd2a92311a87d0/client.go#L76

mholt commented 2 years ago

(Sorry, forgot about this issue!)

After much discussion we settled on using relative names with conversion functions to help: https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/libdns/libdns#AbsoluteName

Thanks for maintaining your libdns repo!