BIND 10 #2386: support generic version of rdata::createRdata(text) in NSEC, DS RDATA

[BIND 10 Development]

#2386: support generic version of rdata::createRdata(text) in NSEC, DS RDATA
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
            Reporter:  jinmei        |                        Owner:  muks
                Type:  task          |                       Status:
            Priority:  medium        |  reviewing
           Component:  libdns++      |                    Milestone:
            Keywords:                |  Sprint-20130305
           Sensitive:  0             |                   Resolution:
         Sub-Project:  DNS           |                 CVSS Scoring:
Estimated Difficulty:  3             |              Defect Severity:  N/A
         Total Hours:  0             |  Feature Depending on Ticket:
                                     |  loadzone-ng
                                     |          Add Hours to Ticket:  0
                                     |                    Internal?:  0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by jinmei):

 Replying to [comment:7 muks]:
 > `ChangeLog` update for this ticket:

 Just happen to notice it from the commit log email:

 > {{{
 > +XYZ.   [func]          muks
 > +       libdns++: the DLV, DS and NSEC Rdata classes now use the generic
 > +       lexer in constructors from text.  This means that the name
 fields
 > +       in such RRs in a zone file can now be non-absolute
 > +       (the origin name in that context will be used), e.g., when
 loaded
 > +       by b10-loadzone. One additional change to the libdns++ API is
 that
 > +       the existing string constructors for these Rdata classes also
 use
 > +       the generic lexer, and they now expect an absolute name (with
 the
 > +       trailing '.') in the name fields.
 > +       (Trac #2386, git ...)
 > +
 > }}}

 I personally think we don't need to provide changelog entry for each
 and every subtask in this category any more.  We provided it for some
 major ones because it was more likely to effect user operations (it's
 not uncommon to specify non numeric parameters for SOA, it's not
 uncommon to use non-absolute names for NS, MX, etc RDATA, etc).
 Unlike these cases, I suspect rest of the work is mostly internal
 refactoring in practice.

 So my specific suggestion is to provide a single summary changelog
 entry when we complete converting all currently supported RDATA types.

 If you (and Jelte) still feel it makes more sense to provide a
 changelog entry for this task, I don't object, but in that case I
 suggest making it more concise.  The proposed text looks like a
 redundant copy of previous ones, and is actually almost irrelevant to
 user's business (people don't write these records by hand, and in all
 practical cases names given will be absolute).

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/2386#comment:10>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development