How much effort is it worth to polish unpeer?

[Eric S. Raymond]

Hal Murray <hmurray at megapathdsl.net>:
> 
> Eric said:
> > I don't think this needs to be pre-1.0, and there's a KISS case for simply
> > documenting it as a known bug.  Opinions? 
> 
> I agree that it doesn't need to be fixed anytime soon and/or for 1.0.
> 
> The reason I sent that message is that it's a good example of what I expect 
> for "the list".  More on that in another message.
> 
> I think that actually fixing it is reasonably simple and low risk.  The hard 
> part would probably be writing the test harness.
> 
> The code to add the hole is:
>         restrict_mask = restrictions(rmtadr);
>         if (RES_FLAGS & restrict_mask) {
>                 msyslog(LOG_INFO, "Server poking hole in restrictions for: 
> %s",
>                         socktoa(rmtadr));
>                 restrict_source(rmtadr, false, 0);
>         }
> 
> The code to remove it should be as simple.  We'll need a new flag for 
> add-hole to set and unpeer to test.
> 
> ---------
> 
> The other part of my message was that maybe we don't want to poke holes in 
> restrictions.  Suppose I decide I don't want to use any servers run by 
> Dilbert but he has a server in the pool.  I'd like to be able to add a 
> restrict line with a flag that says don't poke holes in me.  Then the pool 
> code that processes DNS lookups could skip that slot rather than poke a hole 
> and add it.
> 
> ----------
> 
> Those could be two items on the list or one item that covers them both.

You're allowed to edit devel/TODO, Hal. :-).  And in this case I think you
should, rather than have med edit it into something that might inadvertently
misrepresent what you're after.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>

Please consider contributing to my Patreon page at https://www.patreon.com/esr
so I can keep the invisible wheels of the Internet turning. Give generously -
the civilization you save might be your own.