On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 01:24:40AM -0500, Alfred Morgan wrote:
> httpd uses the configuration processor that relayd uses so I was
> curious to see how this block of sub options were explained in
> relayd.conf(5) and interestingly enough this is not explained there
> either but there are examples of the multiple option block being used.
> One thing I learned from relayd.conf examples was that the sub options
> can also be separated by a coma allowing multiple sub options to be
> written on one line inside the brackets. I confirmed this works the
> same in httpd.conf. This gives us these possibilities to write sub
> options:
> A)
> connection max requests 10
> connection timeout 600
> B)
> connection {
> ? ? max requests 10
> ? ? timeout 600
> }
> C)
> connection { max requests 10, timeout 60 }
> While reading the man page for relayd.conf I found this easy to read
> and simple explanation that we may draw inspiration from -- although
> this still does not explain the sub option block:
> """
> It is possible to specify multiple listen directives with different IP
> ? ? ? protocols in a single redirection configuration:
> ? ? ? ? ? ? redirect "dns" {
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? listen on [1]dns.example.com tcp port 53
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? listen on [2]dns.example.com udp port 53
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? forward to <dnshosts> port 53 check tcp
> ? ? ? ? ? ? }
> """
> I think we are struggling on how to be clear because option and
> sub-option are named the same and the need to distinguish between other
> "non-sub-options", if that makes any sense.
> We could go the relayd.conf(5) method and don't mention anything about
> sub-option blocks and just give examples such as A, B, and C above.
>
ok, i see patching one page is probably not enough. please let this
rest just now till i can get help to figure it out and try and improve
it.
in the meantime i've asked separately about the addition of a tls
example. will let you know.
jmc
