Mats Dufberg
Mats Dufberg
How will the code react if the answer section has a CNAME pointing at a target name, but the `A` record has another owner name? ``` ;; ANSWER SECTION: cname-one.cname.recursor.engine.xa....
> > How will the code react if the answer section has a CNAME pointing at a target name, but the `A` record has another owner name? > > ```...
@mattias-p wrote in https://github.com/zonemaster/zonemaster-engine/pull/1288#discussion_r1409339655: > I believe we need to protect ourselves from an infinite loop here. E.g. when getting a response like this: > > ``` > ;; QUESTION...
> > I could easily try to create these and other scenarios. > > Yes please do. I have added three more scenarios. I guess you will updated the unit...
Three new scenarios, LOOPED-CNAME-IN-ZONE-3, WRONG-CNAME-OWNER-NAME and EXTRA-CNAME-IN-ANSWER, have been added to the test zone (https://github.com/zonemaster/zonemaster/pull/1220). Those are are in addition to TOO-LONG-CNAME-CHAIN, TARGET-NO-MATCH-CNAME and BROKEN-CNAME-CHAIN added yesterday.
@tgreenx, could we complete this together with [Test zones for the CNAME function in Recursor.pm in Engine]? [Test zones for the CNAME function in Recursor.pm in Engine]: https://github.com/zonemaster/zonemaster/pull/1220
Is case preservation really needed here? I cannot see that is wrong to query for `bar.xa` even it RDATA of the CNAME record was `BAR.XA`.
I think this can be merged now.
@mattias-p, please re-review.
@mattias-p, could your re-review?