Adds test scenarios for DNSSEC10#1294
Merged
matsduf merged 41 commits intoNov 27, 2024
Merged
Conversation
886ce93 to
16b0b1c
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
@tgreenx, all test zones are created for updated DNSSEC10. |
marc-vanderwal
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see no obvious issues except for a little typo.
Contributor
Author
|
Commit 1aaab82 adds scenarios |
tgreenx
reviewed
Nov 25, 2024
| * An extra NSEC3PARAM record is returned in the response to the NSEC query. | ||
| * The extra NSEC3PARAM record has the same owner name, but different number | ||
| of iterations. | ||
| * The NSEC3PARAM RRset has been signed with the normal DNSKEY. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| * The NSEC3PARAM RRset has been signed with the normal DNSKEY. | |
| * The NSEC3PARAM RRset has been signed with the correct DNSKEY. |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure that "correct" is more correct than "normal". I will update.
Correction of typo Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: tgreenx <96772376+tgreenx@users.noreply.github.com>
tgreenx
approved these changes
Nov 26, 2024
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment was marked as duplicate.
Sorry, something went wrong.
tgreenx
requested changes
Nov 26, 2024
tgreenx
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The file docs/public/SUMMARY.md should be updated too.
Contributor
Author
Fixed. That is easy to miss. We need a script to search for unlinked documents. |
tgreenx
previously approved these changes
Nov 26, 2024
tgreenx
approved these changes
Nov 27, 2024
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Purpose
The specification of DNSSEC10 has been rewritten in PR #1179 (not yet merged or implemented). This PR defines test scenarios for DNSSEC10 based on the mentioned PR. This PR is not yet complete since all test zones are not yet created.
Context
#1179
Status of PR
The content of the PR is complete. There are two scenarios for which it does not seem to be possible to create test zones with the current tools. My plan is to rearrange the commits and also review what to save in Git. The keys for the Bind zone can probably be left out and recreated each time. Some documentation around Bind and its files will also be updated. None of this affects the test zones for the unit tests.
Changes
All planned scenarios have been defined. Ticked scenarios have complete test zone data and can be used for preliminary unit tests.
How to test this PR
Review the test scenarios. Files under the
Binddirectory are not meaningful to review.