On 9/20/2011 6:15 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
ACK.  Proposal looks like it will work fairly easily with the UI.
We'll have to make some chagnes due to the Add doing something
different based on the type, but that is the case anyway.

Yes, I was thinking how can we integrate this new API to WebUI. AFAIK
you use dnsrecord-add $ZONE $REC --a-rec=... --mx-rec=... for adding a
new DNS record and dnsrecord-mod $ZONE $REC --mx-rec=... when for
example the mx record is being modified. All MX values (even the
unmodified ones) are passed to dnsrecord-mod.

1) I was wondering how the new dnsrecord-<rrtype>-add commands can be
used. I suppose WebUI will know a list of DNS record types with these
new structured commands and offer the user new window to add a record
for these types instead of typing them directly to the text box as it is

When adding a DNS record the user will specify the name and the type, then the UI will show a set of fields based on the selected record type.

So instead of a generic 'data' field like below (click Add):


it will be similar to Permissions (click Add):


The UI will use the type to pick the correct dnsrecord-<rrtype>-add command and each parameter in that command will have a corresponding field to enter the value.

2) But my main concern here is how the modification of current DNS
records should work. Say, we have 2 MX records for example.com. How can
we modify one of it in a new structured interface?

We would have to implement dnsrecord-mx-show method so that you can fill
all the text areas (preference, mailserver). Question is how to refer
the value we want to show since DNS records are multivalued. We could
pass --dnsrecord="..." with DNS record value, e.g. "0 mx.example.com."
and then use the same value for dnsrecord-mx-mod. The whole command
sequence would look this way:

dnsrecord-find example.com      -- get all DNS records for example.com
dnsrecord-show example.com @    -- show DNS records directly in the zone
NS: "ns.example.com"
MX: "0 mx1.example.com."
MX: "1 mx2.example.com."<<  user wants to modify this one ->  new window

I think for each record value the primary keys are the zone name, record name, and the value itself. To simplify operations, we should use the value as a single string. For CLI, users can copy & paste the value more easily.

For UI it depends whether (1) we're going to keep the current edit page where all records with the same name are considered a single entry, or whether (2) we're going to edit each record value in a separate page. See ticket #1478.

If we stay with (1), the link to the edit page consists of zone name and record name only. But if we pick (2) the link consists of zone name, record name, value, and type (which can be obtained from -find output).

dnsrecord-mx-show example.com --dnsrecord="1 mx1.example.com."
PREFERENCE: 1   <<  user modifies this to 0
MAILSERVER: mx2.example.com.

For consistency, the record value should be specified as an argument instead of an option (like in automount). So it will be like this:

dnsrecord-mx-show "example.com" "@" "1 mx1.example.com."
MAILSERVER: mx2.example.com

If we stay with (1) the UI will have to call the dnsrecord-<rrtype>-show for each value to get the value of each fields. The UI will need to implement a new widget (or section) that can handle multiple fields which will be duplicated for each value.

The edit page for (2) is much simpler since it only needs to handle a single type at a time. The output of the -show command will be used to populate each field.

dnsrecord-mx-mod example.com --dnsrecord="1 mx1.example.com." --preference=0

When updating the value, option (1) is a bit more complicated because the UI will have to find the dirty record and then find the dirty field. Option (2) is simpler because it will only need to find the dirty field, but both will execute the following command:

dnsrecord-mx-mod "example.com" "@" "1 mx1.example.com." --preference=0

I think option (2) is more clear to users because we only have to introduce 2 concepts: zone and record (which is the individual value). With option (1) we will have to explain the underlying LDAP entry that will be deleted automatically when the last record value is deleted.

Endi S. Dewata

Freeipa-devel mailing list

Reply via email to