chore: Create a new DnsResolver class that wraps the Java DNS API #2045
Conversation
hessjcg
force-pushed
the
gh-2043-java-dns-wrapper
branch
2 times, most recently
from
300da39 to
cb75da8
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM.
I'd want to try testing the DNS resolver with an integration test to remove the additional indirection between InstanceConnectionNamerResolver -> DNS Resolver -> DNS resolution. If you tested with a real DNS record, you could remove the indrection.
I'll leave this to @jackwotherspoon to sign-off on.
hessjcg
force-pushed
the
gh-2043-java-dns-wrapper
branch
from
13f3828 to
cb75da8
Compare
hessjcg
force-pushed
the
gh-2043-java-dns-wrapper
branch
from
cb75da8 to
b5c6b97
Compare
| import javax.naming.NameNotFoundException; | ||
|
|
||
| interface DnsResolver { | ||
| Collection<String> resolveTxt(String domainName) throws NameNotFoundException; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we are using dnsName in other places, is domainName the same thing or is it a different meaning? If they are one and the same we should consolidate usage to one naming pattern
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Go connector uses DomainName as the configuration field.
I considered fqdn, dnsName, domainName, host, and hostname. FQDN or FullyQualifiedDomainName is too wordy, and dnsName is an expands to "domain name system name", which is self-redundant. I was tempted host, or hostname because that is commonly what it is called as part of the a URL RFC 1738. I decided against it because I wanted to be specific that it needs to contain the domain name.
Go connector uses DNSInstanceConnectionNameResolver for the resolver class name, and DNSResolver for the singleton instance. This refers to the fact that it uses the DNS system to resolve the DomainName into an instance connection name. In retrospect, this felt too wordy, so the class name is DNSResolver in java.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * Returns DNS records for a domain name, sorted alphabetically. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For a domain name, we should only get 1 TXT record if one exists. Why do we have Collection for the return type?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We expect exactly 1 DNS record for an instance. However, it is possible that the connector could receive 0, 1, or many DNS records. Other application logic will gracefully handle cases where the number of responses is not 1 as expected. This class is only responsible for resolving DNS and reporting the results. Thus its data model is in line with the DNS protocol, returning a collection that may contain 0 or more responses.
hessjcg
force-pushed
the
gh-2043-java-dns-wrapper
branch
from
b69274f to
35ceacf
Compare
…API. Part of GoogleCloudPlatform#2043. (GoogleCloudPlatform#2045) This is a prerequisite for other implementation steps in the Automatic Failover with DNS Configuration story. Part of GoogleCloudPlatform#2043.
This is a prerequisite for other implementation steps in the Automatic Failover with DNS Configuration story.
Part of #2043.