On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Joshua Colp <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mark Michelson wrote: > >> Your opinions pretty much mimic mine. >> > > Yay. > > 1) Don't write a DNS library. It's been done many times before by >> others, so just use those. >> 2) Don't jostle things where it is unnecessary. >> > +1000 > >> As far as implementation details, it's far too early to be criticizing >> those, so I just barely skimmed to make sure they made some amount of >> sense. I imagine as things get more nitty-gritty, you'll come up with a >> more detailed plan with structures, API calls, etc. >> >> With regards to the two third-party libraries you presented, my initial >> impression is that I like c-ares better. Honestly, I find the on-site >> documentation for both libraries to be pretty bad, but c-ares is the >> better of the two. I also like that c-ares has functions for parsing >> different DNS record types. I also like that c-ares is hosted on github. >> Other things that would influence me on this decision: >> > +1 for c-ares. Unbound still uses SVN. :) If both of those libraries provide all the functionality required, great. If they'll need contributions, then maybe pjproject should be considered as a DNS provider candidate, separate from the chan_pjsip stack. If enhancements will be needed, it might be better to make them in a project we already have a relationship with. > > <snip> > > Agreed. I'd also add Package Availability to your list. > Unless it's going to be bundled with Asterisk, package availability is a must. Fortunately, both are available as packages, at least for RedHat based distros. One config feature we'd need is the ability to force either ipv4-only or ipv6-only as well as 6 first, then 4.
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
