Use proper section names when producing dig-like output for UPDATEs #1479
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ghost
requested review from
|
That's annoying, but I suppose if this is the correct output we should do it. |
tmthrgd
approved these changes
Sep 12, 2023
mloiseleur
added a commit
to mloiseleur/external-dns
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 2, 2023
alitari
pushed a commit
to alitari/external-dns
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 16, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When
Opcode==OpcodeUpdate,String()should use section names as described in RFC 2136 Section 2:Query -> Zone
Answer -> Prerequisite
Authority -> Update