[Users] ENUM behaviour issue

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

On 08/05/05 22:48, Juha Heinanen wrote:

>Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
>
> > not without development, but I would love to have these options. Never 
> > took a deep look at enum module, but adding AVPs is not at all a big 
> > deal. I will try to make a patch, if no one else volunteers.
>
>if you do these kind of modifications, please don't do it at the expense
>of performance of current, standards compliant operation of the module.
>  
>
I have to admit that I didn't read the specifications, but it is quite 
logic to me to do serial forking if the records have different priority. 
No intention to alter the performance, if it is necessary, new methods 
should be implemented (as I said in my previous mail, I have not much 
inside knowledge about the enum module).

>just for curiosity, can you override the behavior of your email client
>so that it doesn't obey the priority of MX records?
>
Never needed, never tried :-).

>  if not, why would
>it be necessary for enum records?
>  
>
Maybe you can shed some light regarding the priority, what is it good 
for in enum case, how it should be used? In this way, can be decided if 
worth to implement these features. I have other things in my todo list 
in the next days, so I do not want to waste time at all.

Daniel

>-- juha
>
>  
>