Commit dd786429 authored by JINMEI Tatuya's avatar JINMEI Tatuya
Browse files

[2877] documented why we provide DEL_RNAME

parent f8af3f06
......@@ -122,6 +122,15 @@ public:
/// Each derived implementation of deleteRecordInZone() should expect
/// the "params" array to be filled with the values as described in this
/// enumeration, in this order.
///
/// DEL_RNAME is included in case the reversed from is more convenient
/// for the underlying implementation to identify the record to be
/// deleted (reversed names are generally easier to sort, which may help
/// perform the search faster). It's up to the underlying implementation
/// which one (or both) it uses for the search. DEL_NAME and DEL_RNAME
/// are mutually convertible with the understanding of DNS names, and
/// in that sense redundant. But both are provided so the underlying
/// implementation doesn't have to deal with DNS level concepts.
enum DeleteRecordParams {
DEL_NAME = 0, ///< The owner name of the record (a domain name)
///< or the hash label for deleteNSEC3RecordInZone()
......
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment