BIND 10 #464: Additional processing for authoritative NS

[BIND 10 Development]

#464: Additional processing for authoritative NS
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
      Reporter:  zzchen_pku    |        Owner:  zzchen_pku
          Type:  task          |       Status:  reviewing 
      Priority:  major         |    Milestone:            
     Component:  Unclassified  |   Resolution:            
      Keywords:                |    Sensitive:  0         
Estimatedhours:  0.0           |        Hours:  0         
      Billable:  1             |   Totalhours:  0         
      Internal:  0             |  
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
Changes (by vorner):

  * owner:  vorner => zzchen_pku


Comment:

 Just few minor points, and one bigger:

 '''query.cc''':
  - the Query::getAdditional header should have the opening bracket on the
 same line.
  - Line 75 is too long (81 characters, the guidelines recommend max 79)
  - The assert is probably wrong. The fact that one zone does not contain a
 NS RRset at the apex is not a programmer error, an exception that can be
 caught should be used instead (probably derived from BadZone, as the
 missing SOA one is). It is not possible to catch asserts, they kill the
 program right away.

 '''query.h''':
  - „For now, in order to optimize the additional section processing, we“ ‒
 what is optimised by including more data in the answer? I don't see an
 optimisation (possibly simplification of the code, yes, but I guess that
 sending more data will not make it faster).

 The tests:
  - Could you add an out of zone nameserver to the auth_ns_rrset? Its
 address should not be included in the answer (nor can be, as it is
 unknown), but just to make sure it does not crash or anything like that.
  - Also, it might be worth putting the *_query.process calls inside
 EXPECT_NO_THROW. Not that it would change the result of tests, but now,
 when anything is thrown, the whole test crashes, which means additional
 output (possibly more failure reports) are missing and they can help
 finding the problem.

 Thank you

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/464#comment:3>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development