BIND 10 #1389: xfrout should allow a message with size of 65535

[BIND 10 Development]

#1389: xfrout should allow a message with size of 65535
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                   Reporter:         |                 Owner:  jinmei
  jinmei                             |                Status:  reviewing
                       Type:         |             Milestone:
  defect                             |  Sprint-20111206
                   Priority:  major  |            Resolution:
                  Component:         |             Sensitive:  0
  xfrout                             |           Sub-Project:  DNS
                   Keywords:         |  Estimated Difficulty:  2
            Defect Severity:  N/A    |           Total Hours:  1.25
Feature Depending on Ticket:  AXFR-  |
  out                                |
        Add Hours to Ticket:  0      |
                  Internal?:  0      |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by jinmei):

 Replying to [comment:10 vorner]:
 > Hello

 > > We can talk about it.  One quick note is that this is what BIND 9
 > > currently does, so we basically follow existing practice.  I know it's
 >
 > Well, the fact that other implementation does that doesn't make it
 right.

 I didn't mean that but just tried to note what the current BIND 10
 does may not necessarily be a result of mere laziness (I didn't write
 that part of implementation of xfrout, so I actually don't know).  I'd
 also point out that other implementations often do something specific
 as a result of practical compromise.  It's not very wise not to try to
 learn from that by just dogmatically saying it's suboptimal.

 But, of course, in some other cases it's possible that the behavior of
 existing implementation is really wrong or doesn't make sense today
 while it might at the time it was written.  That's perfectly valid to
 behave differently with the understanding the rationale of others and
 with considerations on what really makes sense now on top of it.

 So, as we both agreed, the right next step is to discuss this at
 bind10-dev.

 > Yes, it fixes it. Please merge.

 Okay, thanks, merge done.  Closing ticket.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/1389#comment:12>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development