On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer <
cales...@scientia.net> wrote:
> it's just that we're probably better off with
> suggesting people only one variant... so we can phase out the other on
> the long term scale...
>
I'll make "dns-nameserver" the canonical one and "dns-nameservers" an
explicitly supported alternative. The former is more consistent with the
semantics of resolv.conf; the latter is too established to eliminate now.
The other reason for recommending "dns-nameserver" is that it takes exactly
one argument. This leaves room to extend the semantics of this option in
the future. E.g., it might be useful to be able to say
dns-nameserver 192.168.1.254 some.domain
dns-nameserver 12.34.56.78 another.one
dns-nameserver 8.8.8.8
meaning that *.some.domain queries should be routed to 192.168.1.254;
*.another.one to 12.34.56.78 and the rest to 8.8.8.8. Dnsmasq supports this
sort of query routing.
Perhaps you should also ask the ifupdown people what they're going to
> plan with their stanzas at the long term.
> Especially for the "address" keyword a version that supports more
> addresses per line would be reasonable... and I guess the concepts
> should be kept more or less sync on all the /e/n/interfaces keywords.
>
Accepting multiple instances of an option in a stanza is a feature that was
recently added to ifupdown. I presume that it will continue to be a
supported feature in the future. :)
--
Thomas
