-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 64
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix TXT record equality #374
Conversation
Thank you for the PR! I’m not sure this is a good idea, though, as this implementation means that TXT record data parsed as a One option is to implement a wrapper type, say (As an aside, if we change the |
Are you sure it would compare differently @partim? I'm not too familiar with this crate but if Good point about |
Erm, I think I’ve gotten this all backwards and you are actually implementing what I am arguing for. Sorry about that. But wouldn’t it then be easier to just compare the underlying octets? |
Cool cool :) I think comparing the octets is a great idea in general. Looking at |
Deriving will force trait bounds that will then break the macros that create the rdata enums. I think |
@partim thanks! We stole the Also changed |
A TXT record with strings ["foo", "bar"] is not equal to a TXT record with strings ["foob", "ar"]. This is important for resolvers and DNS servers deduplicating RRs. This uses the underlying octets for comparison.
Thank you again for the PR and the subsequent changes! This looks good to merge now. |
Great news, super exciting, thanks for the quick merge @partim! |
Thanks for the quick merge! |
A TXT record with strings ["foo", "bar"] is not equal to a TXT record with strings ["foob", "ar"].
This is important for resolvers and DNS servers deduplicating RRs. This fixes
PartialEq
accordingly.