[Savannah-cvs] [129] DNS: expand with entry syntax

[Assaf Gordon]

Revision: 129
          
http://svn.sv.gnu.org/viewvc/?view=rev&root=administration&revision=129
Author:   agn
Date:     2015-02-11 03:52:58 +0000 (Wed, 11 Feb 2015)
Log Message:
-----------
DNS: expand with entry syntax

Modified Paths:
--------------
    trunk/sviki/DNS.mdwn

Modified: trunk/sviki/DNS.mdwn
===================================================================
--- trunk/sviki/DNS.mdwn        2015-02-04 00:13:28 UTC (rev 128)
+++ trunk/sviki/DNS.mdwn        2015-02-11 03:52:58 UTC (rev 129)
@@ -22,3 +22,50 @@
 
 Then `dig` or `nslookup` or `host` or whatever can be used to verify the
 change, if desired.
+
+## entries format
+
+Always use *relative* domain names in savannah's `savannah.footer` file.
+Use the following syntax:
+
+    foo         10800 IN  vcs
+    bar.vcs     10800 IN  vcs
+
+and **not** the following syntax:
+
+    # BAD Example: DO NOT USE FQDN entries
+    foo.savannah.gnu.org.       10800  IN  vcs.savannah.gnu.org.
+    bar.vcs.savannah.gnu.org.   10800  IN  vcs.savannah.gnu.org.
+
+
+Bob Proulx Explains:
+
+> This is very specific to the savannah strategy of using include files
+> to make names in the left hand side appear in both the `sv.gnu.org` and
+> the `sv.nongnu.org` domains both at the same time.  And also into the
+> `savannah.gnu.org` and `savannah.nongnu.org` domains.  Both of those files
+> `$INCLUDE savannah.footer` in order to include the relative names on the
+> left hand side into each of those domains.  When an absolute path is
+> used it means that strategy is defeated.
+>
+> If you look through the way the files are structured you will see that
+> they had the goal of making all of the names appear in all four of
+> these domains:
+>
+>     savannah.gnu.org
+>     savannah.nongnu.org
+>     sv.gnu.org
+>     sv.nongnu.org
+>
+> So a name foo on the left hand side will become:
+>
+>     foo.savannah.gnu.org
+>     foo.savannah.nongnu.org
+>     foo.sv.gnu.org
+>     foo.sv.nongnu.org
+>
+> So someone came up with the include strategy to do it.  I haven't ever
+> seen that done like that before.  But I can see they were trying to
+> use one list instead of four.  That seems admirable.
+
+See also the 'internal' section in [[SavannahServices]] for more details.