why the new complaints about inherited owner?

[Jo Rhett]

> In message <156EB0AC-6774-4B0E-AACE-1CB4BAAB90D1 at netconsonance.com>, Jo Rhett writes:
>> There's actually no $ORIGIN statement in these zone files. It's sending
>> this error in response to
>> 
>> @ IN SOA ...
>>    IN NS ...
>>    IN NS ...
>>    IN MX …

On Nov 25, 2014, at 5:59 PM, Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org> wrote:
> ictx->origin_changed wasn't being properly set on include push.
> All "$INCLUDE file origin" wasn't properly handled.
> 
> diff --git a/lib/dns/master.c b/lib/dns/master.c
> …

Yeah, that seems like an appropriate fix.

>> This above is not only perfectly bog-standard, but it is shown this way
>> in RFC1035 and not obsoleted yet by any succeeding standard.
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035
> 
> There is a difference between "legal" and "safe".
> 
> "if (a = b)" is legal C but it is not safe C.
> 
> Most of the time this should have been "if (a == b)”

Of course. Not sure how that comment relates.

I have absolutely no problem if ISC wants to say “this is bad and here’s why…” my only concern was that I couldn’t find a single bit of information anywhere as to why it was bad. Happy to change practice if given documentation of the need.

-- 
Jo Rhett
+1 (415) 999-1798
Skype: jorhett
Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and internet projects.