[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH] 0009 Support for IPv6 elements in idnsForwarders attribute

[Petr Spacek]

Hello,

here is (again) reworked patch for
https://fedorahosted.org/bind-dyndb-ldap/ticket/49 .

Adam pointed me to existing BIND parser, which I missed. Now is all 
parsing & socket magic done inside BIND libraries. Our code is a bit 
shorter and syntax is 100% BIND-compatible. (But it means same as 
discussed yesterday :-)

Adam, please review it.

Thanks.

Petr^2 Spacek

On 03/01/2012 03:22 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
> Hello,
>
> here is reworked patch for
> https://fedorahosted.org/bind-dyndb-ldap/ticket/49 .
>
> Changes after yesterday's discussion on IRC with Simo and Mkosek:
> It follows BIND9 syntax for optional specification of port & adds
> documentation for this new syntax.
>
> Petr^2 Spacek
>
> On 02/29/2012 05:33 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> I agree that we should keep the BIND syntax and separate port and IP
>> address with a space. We will at least avoid possible issues with IP
>> address decoding in the future.
>>
>> Since this is a new attribute we have a good chance to do changes now so
>> that it is used correctly. I created an upstream ticket to change the
>> behavior and validators in FreeIPA:
>>
>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2462
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 16:44 +0100, Petr Spacek wrote:
>>> On 02/29/2012 04:30 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>>> Either way looks ok to me.
>>>> I agree that using a space may be less confusing if this syntax never
>>>> allows to specify multiple addresses.
>>>> If multiple address can be specified than it may be less ideal to use
>>>> spaces.
>>>>
>>>> Simo.
>>>
>>> idnsForwarders is multi-value attribute, so each value contain single
>>> forwarder address.
>>>
>>> Petr^2 Spacek
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 15:14 +0100, Petr Spacek wrote:
>>>>> And there is the patch, sorry.
>>>>>
>>>>> Petr^2
>>>>>
>>>>> On 02/29/2012 03:10 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this patch fixes https://fedorahosted.org/bind-dyndb-ldap/ticket/49 ,
>>>>>> but I want to discuss one (unimplemented) change:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I propose a change in (currently very strange) forwarders syntax.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Current syntax:
>>>>>> <IP>[.port]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> examples:
>>>>>> 1.2.3.4 (without optional port)
>>>>>> 1.2.3.4.5553 (optional port 5553)
>>>>>> A::B (IPv6, without optional port)
>>>>>> A::B.5553
>>>>>> ::FFFF:1.2.3.4 (6to4, without optional port)
>>>>>> ::FFFF:1.2.3.4.5553 (6to4, with optional port 5553)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I find this syntax confusing, non-standard and not-typo-proof.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IMHO better choice is to follow BIND forwarders syntax:
>>>>>> <IP> [port ip_port] (port is string delimited with spaces)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (From: http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch7/queries.html#forwarders)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Current syntax is not documented*, so probably is not used anywhere.
>>>>>> (And DNS server on non-standard port is probably useful only for
>>>>>> testing
>>>>>> purposes, but it's another story.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is you opinion?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bind-dyndb-ldap-pspacek-0009-Add-support-for-IPv6-elements-in-idnsForwarders-attr.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 10121 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/attachments/20120301/66e4f7fa/attachment.bin>