On 01/09/2021 12:45, Dominik DL6ER wrote: > Hey Simon, > > On Tue, 2021-08-31 at 21:09 +0100, Simon Kelley wrote: >> I've tagged 2.86rc2. I've systematically tested the affected code, >> and we're dog-fooding it now. It would be good to get as much other >> testing in as possible before the 2.86. > > We have automated CI testing putting a lot of queries (and different > query types) through it and nothing unexpected happened. > We've added the patch into our beta testing so we have at least a few > dozen additional testers of the new code on our side, too. > > I've seen two minor things but this is really nit-picky: > >> dig TYPE65 https.dns.netmeister.org > > leads to > >> reply https.dns.netmeister.org is type=65 > > whereas I'd consider > >> reply https.dns.netmeister.org is [type=65] > > slightly more elegant because it is the type of the reply, not the > content. The necessary change would be querystr(NULL, aqtype) -> > querystr("", aqtype) in the "else" branch of "if (aqtype == T_TXT)" but > that's entirely your call.
For consistency if we know the type we do reply https.dns.netmeister.org is <TXT> so if we don't know the type we should do reply https.dns.netmeister.org is <type=65> I've implemented that. > > Also, DNSSEC signed TXT records were not logged as such with log- > queries=extra. print_txt() needs secflag for this. Patch attached. > Patch applied. Removing the declaration for int i breaks when building DNSSEC code, so I changed that to use the j counter variable instead. > I'll report back if anything odd comes up. Silence will be a good > thing. Great, thanks for your help. It's all running fine here too. I tagged 2.86rc3 for completeness. Simon. > > Best, > Dominik > _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss