Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement IPv6 support for DNS, fix some DNS server behaviours #186

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Implement IPv6 support for DNS, fix some DNS server behaviours #186

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

fincham
Copy link
Contributor

@fincham fincham commented Jan 14, 2022

This commit allows the DNS server to serve IPv6 address records (AAAA) for both interaction and NS glue. In combination with the changes in #181 and #182 this allows for IPv6 interaction and provides more opportunities for interaction to ocurr when e.g. IPv6 and IPv4 egress firewalling differ on a network being tested.

Specifying the '-ip' option multiple times now allows setting multiple response addresses for the DNS server. Both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses are supported. If no IP address is specified the auto-detected address will be logged at startup time to aid with troubleshooting.

Fixes a couple of behaviour bugs with the DNS server implementation and changes the default TTL to 5 from 3600.

This commit allows the DNS server to serve IPv6 address records (AAAA)
for both interaction and NS glue. In combination with the changes in
PRs #181 and #182 this allows for IPv6 interaction and provides more
opportunities for interaction to ocurr when e.g. IPv6 and IPv4 egress
firewalling differ on a network being tested.

Specifying the '-ip' option multiple times now allows setting multiple
response addresses for the DNS server. Both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses are
supported. If no IP address is specified the auto-detected address will
be logged at startup time to aid with troubleshooting.

Fixes a couple of behaviour bugs with the DNS server implementation and
changes the default TTL to 5 from 3600.
@ehsandeep ehsandeep requested review from Mzack9999 and Ice3man543 and removed request for Mzack9999 January 14, 2022 07:38
@fincham
Copy link
Contributor Author

fincham commented Jan 14, 2022

I should say as well: this is a fairly big diff and I'm certainly open to revising it if it isn't in line with your plans for things.

@ehsandeep ehsandeep added the Status: Review Needed The issue has a PR attached to it which needs to be reviewed label Jan 22, 2022
Copy link
Member

@ehsandeep ehsandeep left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code conflict

@pulse-michaelfincham
Copy link
Contributor

Hi folks,

I'm going to look at re-writing this patch and will re-submit it against current dev.

Cheers,
Michael

@ehsandeep
Copy link
Member

@pulse-michaelfincham thank you 🙌🏻 It would be great if you could split the PR into multiple, each with a particular change.

@ehsandeep
Copy link
Member

@pulse-michaelfincham I created #307 for one of the features introduced in this, and I intended to do the same for two other changes made in this PR, but I don't have enough context, so I'll leave it up to you to put it in the PR or issue.

Thanks again, closing this PR now as this will be handled separately.

@ehsandeep ehsandeep closed this Jun 20, 2022
@ehsandeep ehsandeep removed the Status: Review Needed The issue has a PR attached to it which needs to be reviewed label Jun 20, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants