BIND 10 #1643: TSIG configuration syntax should be as consistent as possible for auth and xfrout

[BIND 10 Development]

#1643: TSIG configuration syntax should be as consistent as possible for auth and
xfrout
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                   Reporter:         |                 Owner:  jinmei
  jinmei                             |                Status:  reviewing
                       Type:         |             Milestone:
  defect                             |  Sprint-20120306
                   Priority:  major  |            Resolution:
                  Component:         |             Sensitive:  0
  configuration                      |           Sub-Project:  DNS
                   Keywords:         |  Estimated Difficulty:  5
            Defect Severity:  N/A    |           Total Hours:  0
Feature Depending on Ticket:         |
        Add Hours to Ticket:  0      |
                  Internal?:  0      |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by jinmei):

 Replying to [comment:9 vorner]:

 I think you can merge the branch.

 Some followup and minor additional comments.

 - I made a few minor editorial cleanups.
 - the additional checks for `_add_remote_config_internal` look good,
   but these cases don't seem to be tested:
 {{{#!python
             if rcode == 0:
                 if value != None:
                     if module_spec.validate_config(False, value):
                         module_cfg.set_local_config(value)
                         call_callback = True
                     else:
                         raise ModuleCCSessionError("Bad config data for "
 +
                                                    module_name + ": " +
                                                    str(value))
             else:
                 raise ModuleCCSessionError("Failure requesting remote " +
                                            "configuration data for " +
                                            module_name)
 }}}
 - I just noticed you could avoid one more temporary variable in
   tsig_keyring.py:
 {{{#!python
         (data, _) = self.__session.get_remote_config_value('tsig_keys',
                                                                  'keys')
 }}}

 > I tried running pycoverage, but it fails for me with this error:
 > {{{
 > Running test: edns_python_test.py
 > Traceback (most recent call last):
 >   File
 "/home/vorner/work/bind10/src/lib/dns/python/tests/edns_python_test.py",
 line 18, in <module>
 >     from pydnspp import *
 > ImportError: dynamic module does not define init function (initpydnspp)
 > make[7]: *** [check-local] Error 1
 > }}}
 >
 > This seems to happen reliably with all wrapper modules, and I need to
 look into it sometime. I didn't want to hold this ticket because of it,
 though.

 I don't think we should fix edns_python_test within this ticket, but
 you don't have to run all coverage tests to see the coverage for the
 specific branch (apparently you seemed to do that and fail).  I use
 the attached script and run it as follows:

 % cd bind10-1643/src/lib/python/isc/config/tests
 % python-tests-coverage.sh -b 1643 ccsession_test.py

 In case you're interested, I've copied the results at:
 http://bind10.isc.org/~jinmei/python-coverage/

 The coverage of ccsession.py seems very bad, but it looks like missing
 many parts that should actually be covered by the tests.  Maybe the
 use of a mock class confuses the coverage tool.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/1643#comment:10>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development