Opened 10 years ago

Closed 9 years ago

#197 closed enhancement (fixed)

loadzone allow optional comment for $TTL per rfc2308

Reported by: jreed Owned by: shentingting
Priority: medium Milestone: 06. 4th Incremental Release
Component: loadzone Version:
Keywords: Cc:
CVSS Scoring: Parent Tickets:
Sensitive: no Defect Severity:
Sub-Project: Feature Depending on Ticket:
Estimated Difficulty: 0.0 Add Hours to Ticket:
Total Hours: Internal?: no

Description (last modified by jreed)

RFC2308 shows:

The Master File format [RFC 1035 Section 5] is extended to include
the following directive:

$TTL <TTL> [comment]

This is for f2f task 86

Subtickets

Change History (11)

comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by jreed

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by zhanglikun

  • Component changed from Unclassified to loadzone
  • Milestone set to 04. 2nd Incremental Release
  • Owner set to shentingting
  • Status changed from new to assigned

Tingting, I think you have added this feature in revision 1898(nice number). Please make sure if it support extention TTL like $TTL 8m7d9s.

comment:3 Changed 9 years ago by zhanglikun

  • Milestone 04. 2nd Incremental Release deleted

comment:4 Changed 9 years ago by shentingting

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from assigned to closed

The code has already included this feature!

comment:5 Changed 9 years ago by shentingting

  • Resolution fixed deleted
  • Status changed from closed to reopened

Sorry I closed the ticket by accident, reopen it to review.

comment:6 Changed 9 years ago by shentingting

The code has been committed in r2340 in trunk, please check.

comment:7 Changed 9 years ago by jreed

  • Owner changed from shentingting to jreed
  • Status changed from reopened to reviewing

comment:8 Changed 9 years ago by jinmei

  • billable set to 1
  • Internal? unset

Just checking: r2340 seems quite big, and it seems to contain other
changes that are irrelevant to the subject of this ticket.

Which part of it is requested to be reviewed? If it's part of the
diff, please specify which is to be reviewed.

One quick comment btw: I suspect parse_ttl could yield an invalid
value for TTL that is, an integer larger than 0xffffffff. I also
suspect it could accept various kind of invalid form such as:

  • 1.5
  • 2X
  • "1D 1M"

It also accepts "1D1D". I'm not sure if it's intentional (for that
matter BIND 9 also seems to accept it).

Another point I just happened to notice: why ttl_regex is explicitly
declared as global?

ttl_regex = re.compile('([0-9]+[wdhms]?)+', re.I)
def isttl(s):
    global ttl_regex
    if ttl_regex.match(s):
        return True
    else:
        return False

Since it's used as a read-only object in this context, this global
should be redundant.

comment:9 Changed 9 years ago by jinmei

  • Owner changed from jreed to shentingting

comment:10 Changed 9 years ago by jinmei

  • Milestone set to 06. 4th Incremental Release
  • Type changed from defect to enhancement

comment:11 Changed 9 years ago by shentingting

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from reviewing to closed

The code has been merged. So close this ticket.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.