From 1ed8c0fbb4cc51413f3a6025233f41c19f154bc1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lennart Poettering Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:44:16 +0100 Subject: resolved: rename "downgrade-ok" mode to "allow-downgrade" After discussing this with Tom, we figured out "allow-downgrade" sounds nicer. --- src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c') diff --git a/src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c b/src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c index 870b7586fd..44267c6b2d 100644 --- a/src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c +++ b/src/resolve/resolved-dns-transaction.c @@ -939,7 +939,7 @@ static int dns_transaction_prepare(DnsTransaction *t, usec_t ts) { * this means we cannot do any DNSSEC logic * anymore. */ - if (t->scope->dnssec_mode == DNSSEC_DOWNGRADE_OK) { + if (t->scope->dnssec_mode == DNSSEC_ALLOW_DOWNGRADE) { /* We are in downgrade mode. In this * case, synthesize an unsigned empty * response, so that the any lookup @@ -2266,7 +2266,7 @@ int dns_transaction_validate_dnssec(DnsTransaction *t) { dns_server_packet_rrsig_missing(t->server); - if (t->scope->dnssec_mode == DNSSEC_DOWNGRADE_OK) { + if (t->scope->dnssec_mode == DNSSEC_ALLOW_DOWNGRADE) { /* Downgrading is OK? If so, just consider the information unsigned */ -- cgit v1.2.3-54-g00ecf