BIND 10 #678: UDPServer and TCPServer classes need clenup and tests.

[BIND 10 Development]

#678: UDPServer and TCPServer classes need clenup and tests.
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                 Reporter:  vorner   |                Owner:  hanfeng
                     Type:  defect   |               Status:  new
                 Priority:           |            Milestone:  A-Team-
  critical                           |  Sprint-20110309
                Component:           |           Resolution:
  Unclassified                       |            Sensitive:  0
                 Keywords:           |  Add Hours to Ticket:  0
Estimated Number of Hours:  0.0      |          Total Hours:  0
                Billable?:  1        |
                Internal?:  0        |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Description changed by jreed:

Old description:

> As discussed on jabber and #357, these classes need tests. Partly because
> they never had any and partly because of the recent changes.
>
> Also there was a suggestion to replace close() with cancel() and handle
> it in the coroutine. That way it would allow to recognize real errors and
> just close.
>
> Anyway, the original idea was to revert and reopen #388, but we decided
> to keep it in master, because it has a functionality that would be nice
> in the release. So this is kind of continuation of #388.
>
> I'm giving this to you (both because of #388 and because we don't know
> who is responsible for the missing tests for the original implementation
> of the classes).

New description:

 As discussed on jabber and #657, these classes need tests. Partly because
 they never had any and partly because of the recent changes.

 Also there was a suggestion to replace close() with cancel() and handle it
 in the coroutine. That way it would allow to recognize real errors and
 just close.

 Anyway, the original idea was to revert and reopen #388, but we decided to
 keep it in master, because it has a functionality that would be nice in
 the release. So this is kind of continuation of #388.

 I'm giving this to you (both because of #388 and because we don't know who
 is responsible for the missing tests for the original implementation of
 the classes).

--

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://bind10.isc.org/ticket/678#comment:1>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development