fix: addresses incorrect after server name change#1154
Merged
Conversation
d623698 to
7681d7a
Compare
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1154 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.76% 99.77%
=======================================
Files 22 22
Lines 2608 2646 +38
Branches 457 461 +4
=======================================
+ Hits 2602 2640 +38
Misses 4 4
Partials 2 2
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
bdraco
commented
Apr 3, 2023
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
If the server name changed we would return the addresses for the old server name.
If the server name differed from the record name we would include the wrong addresses if the SRV record was not already in the cache because we would never ask for it and use the record name to lookup the A/AAAA records.
The downside is that this will likely increase the number of network requests but #1153 should mitigate the impact of that a bit