In message <1505796688.2518.99.ca...@biplane.com.au>, Karl Auer writes:
> On Tue, 2017-09-19 at 13:56 +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > In message <1505734269.2518.70.ca...@biplane.com.au>, Karl Auer
> > writes:
> > > And is it true that "if the Regexp field is not empty, the
> > > Replacement field
On Tue, 2017-09-19 at 13:56 +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <1505734269.2518.70.ca...@biplane.com.au>, Karl Auer
> writes:
> > And is it true that "if the Regexp field is not empty, the
> > Replacement field will not be used"?
> With the current flags no but who know what will happen in
In message <1505734269.2518.70.ca...@biplane.com.au>, Karl Auer writes:
> On Mon, 2017-09-18 at 19:45 +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > In message <1505723565.2518.54.ca...@biplane.com.au>, Karl Auer
> > writes:
> > > 2: Can the Replacement field be empty? It looks from the text and
> > > examples
On Mon, 2017-09-18 at 19:45 +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <1505723565.2518.54.ca...@biplane.com.au>, Karl Auer
> writes:
> > 2: Can the Replacement field be empty? It looks from the text and
> > examples as if it should always contain a complete domain name BUT
> > that if the Regexp
In message <1505723565.2518.54.ca...@biplane.com.au>, Karl Auer writes:
> I've been reading RFC2915 and have a couple of questions about NAPTR
> records. I'm trying to do *basic* validation of data from a database
> being processed into the DNS.
>
> 1: Can the Flags field be
I've been reading RFC2915 and have a couple of questions about NAPTR
records. I'm trying to do *basic* validation of data from a database
being processed into the DNS.
1: Can the Flags field be empty? It seems to me that it can be under
some circumstances.
2: Can the Replacement field be empty
6 matches
Mail list logo
