Bug 790017 - RFE: Resource Record type options should be more descriptive.
Summary: RFE: Resource Record type options should be more descriptive.
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: ipa
Version: 6.3
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Rob Crittenden
QA Contact: IDM QE LIST
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-02-13 13:58 UTC by Gowrishankar Rajaiyan
Modified: 2012-06-20 13:32 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: ipa-2.2.0-3.el6
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
No documentation needed.
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-06-20 13:32:22 UTC
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2012:0819 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE ipa bug fix and enhancement update 2012-06-19 20:34:17 UTC

Description Gowrishankar Rajaiyan 2012-02-13 13:58:39 UTC
Description of problem:

This is raised as part of IPA DNS Test Day general feed back.

There seems to be confusion in how one should use the ipa dnsrecord-add options with respect to the resource records. For e.g., It is assumed by the user that --srv-rec should/can be used with --srv-priority --srv-weight --srv-port --srv-target, which is actually not the case. 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
ipa-server-2.2.0-101.20120127T0607zgit6863b8f.el6.x86_64

How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. See description
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:
Expanding the "ipa dnsrecord-add" with some more info on its description and usage would certainly help here.

Additional info:

Comment 2 Dmitri Pal 2012-02-13 16:37:48 UTC
Upstream ticket:
https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2382

Comment 3 Martin Kosek 2012-02-28 17:27:48 UTC
I was thinking about this issue. It is true, that user may be get confused with all these new options until he gets a bit more familiar with it and understands the concepts behind the scenes.

Would it be OK with you if we enhance ipa DNS help (`ipa help dns') and explain the concept of structured DNS options and how they operate in ADD, MOD and DEL commands, with few examples? Any other ideas how to make the new DNS operations more clear are welcome.

Comment 4 Gowrishankar Rajaiyan 2012-02-29 09:46:09 UTC
Yes, I think that would be OK as this is more related to usability and with enhanced ipa DNS help (`ipa help dns`) operations would be more clear.

Comment 5 Rob Crittenden 2012-03-02 20:07:54 UTC
fixed upstream.

master: 640dee7caad4a1bf7c05bb539f0e6655fe758a54

ipa-2-2: b6ef6af22c931c92a53be74b406918d9bc748e8e

Comment 7 Gowrishankar Rajaiyan 2012-03-06 15:31:15 UTC
`ipa help dns` is very comprehensive indeed. 
Thanks Martin.

<snip>
USING STRUCTURED PER-TYPE OPTIONS

There are many structured DNS RR types where DNS data stored in LDAP server
is not just a scalar value, for example an IP address or a domain name, but
a data structure which may be often complex. A good example is a LOC record
[RFC1876] which consists of many mandatory and optional parts (degrees,
minutes, seconds of latitude and longitude, altitude or precision).

It may be difficult to manipulate such DNS records without making a mistake
and entering an invalid value. DNS module provides an abstraction over these
raw records and allows to manipulate each RR type with specific options. For
each supported RR type, DNS module provides a standard option to manipulate
a raw records with format --<rrtype>-rec, e.g. --mx-rec, and special options
for every part of the RR structure with format --<rrtype>-<partname>, e.g.
--mx-preference and --mx-exchanger.

When adding a record, either RR specific options or standard option for a raw
value can be used, they just should not be combined in one add operation. When
modifying an existing entry, new RR specific options can be used to change
one part of a DNS record, where the standard option for raw value is used
to specify the modified value. The following example demonstrates
a modification of MX record preference form 0 to 1 in a record without
modifying the exchanger:
ipa dnsrecord-mod --mx-rec="0 mx.example.com." --mx-preference=1
</snip>

Verified: ipa-server-2.2.0-3.el6.x86_64

Comment 9 Martin Kosek 2012-04-24 11:37:17 UTC
    Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field
    accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team.
    
    New Contents:
No documentation needed.

Comment 12 errata-xmlrpc 2012-06-20 13:32:22 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-0819.html


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.