On 2006/10/09 19:10, Juha Heinanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Klaus Darilion writes: > > > Since August the interims infrastructure ENUM methods based on branching > > inside the e164.arpa domain is working group item. > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-enum-combined-00.txt > > klaus, > > we have previously had policy that new features will be added when the > drafts become working group documents or are otherwise widely > implemented. since this draft is working group draft, i could include > the patch.
I'm glad to hear that. > > This patch adds the following items: > > 1. extend openser's resolver to support TXT and EBL records. > > > > 2. extend the ENUM module to allow the use of the TXT-record based > > interm solution as described in draft-ietf-enum-combined > > > > 3. extend the ENUM module to allow usage of the EBL-record based interm > > solution as described in draft-ietf-enum-branch-location-record > > > > 4. extend the ENUM module to allow branching at the country-code level > > > > What about adding the patch to the enum module? > > what are its performance implications to a regular user enum query? is > there a new parameter or function name to tell that this is an infra > enum query? The changes to the default code-path are as follows: Instead of enum_query_0 and enum_query_1 calling enum_query_2, now all of those call enum_query_3 with the default parameters. (This means one function call overhead more for the enum_query_2 case.) There is one if() on the new parameter which triggers the extra code if necessary. And then there is one extra if() in the number-reversing loop. Summary: at worst case, user-enum gets an extra function-call overhead, 16 simple if() tests, and a few bytes more on the stack in the function. /ol -- < Otmar Lendl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | nic.at Systems Engineer > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
