Re: Live-DNS testing infrastructure

Julian Mehnle ha scritto:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>> Julian Mehnle ha scritto:
>>> Can we instead agree instead on having a public DNS zone delegated to
>>> your server and have it serve test records from there?  That seems
>>> cleaner to me than forcing implementations to use a specific resolver
>>> server.
>> No. The Yaml tests do not share the same zone. In fact every single
>> yaml test declare its own zone (zonedata:) and I reconfigure the live
>> tester and empty the caches at each test to make it work.
>>
>> If you make sure that the "zonedata:" from the rfc4408 can be merged in
>> a single zonedata without conflicts then we can use this way.
> 
> That's certainly possible.  Just number the scenarios sequentially and 
> construct names like this:
> 
>   <name-in-zonedata>.<#-of-scenario>.2008_08.rfc4408.test.openspf.org
> 
> DNS names are unique within each scenario.

This would require an option to "mock" any dns query by appending 
".<#-of-scenario>.2008_08.rfc4408.test.openspf.org" to the queried name.

I would prefer the test suite to already use the right names.

>> In this case maybe you should rename the "example.com" in the testsuite
>> to "testsuite.openspf.org" and then have that ptr pointing to some host
>> where we run the live zone...
> 
> I don't think such a PTR-wise redirection is going to work.  It will have 
> to be a proper zone delegation.
> 
>> not sure how feasible it is (I'm not ready to host a public service for
>> this, I can manage if someone offer a box).
> 
> Can anyone reading this host a nameserver for this?

While we wait to see if anyone offer this, I'd like to know if any of 
the implementors having a command line interface plan to add support to 
specify a "custom dns server" or not. If no one adds such an option it 
does not make any sense for me to release a tool and document it if the 
only tested library is jSPF that is already tested programmatically by 
the same code.

So, if anyone is interested I expect them to add a new option (let's say 
-s/--server ip[:port]) to their command line.

Once/If I'll see implementations supporting this I'll complete the 
command line tester.

Stefano