Closed Bug 332179 Opened 18 years ago Closed 18 years ago

Set up some CNAMEs for bugzilla to enable cross-domain testing


( Graveyard :: Server Operations, task, P1)



(Not tracked)



(Reporter: bzbarsky, Assigned: justdave)


It would be really useful for testing of cross-domain security stuff, document.domain, etc, if we had several different CNAMEs that all pointed to bugzilla (so we could attach testcases that effectively have different parts in different domains).  I propose the following cnames (or something similar):

Would that be reasonable?
Does the fact that it's SSL confuse anything?
Well, the cert won't match the hostname unless we do something...  I'd rather we did something, but even if we don't the CNAMEs would be useful.  I'm not sure whether they'd work with XMLHttpRequest and such, and I'd really like it if they did....
The cert is for *  As long as it ends in and only has one part before that, the cert will match.

I was more concerned if that would have other side effects on the tests you're running since I think the security constraints on scripts are different on SSL than they are in the clear.  But I don't know much about it.
I'm interested in feedback from dveditz and/or jruderman about this before I proceed.  Besides the question I brought up in the previous comment, I'm also interested in opinions on whether Bugzilla is really the right place to test this stuff.
How will this interact with the fix for bug 38862?
As long as all the hostnames involved point to the same IP, not at all, I would think.
I'm all for it, I've already created testcases that rely on using the current machine name recluse, but that's fragile.

Bugzilla is not the place for testing (experimentation), but it's definitely the place for test *cases*. Otherwise they get remotely hosted and tend to go away as students graduate, people change ISPs, or housecleaning murders innocent old files.

Especially for security bugs, if we can save QA from having to set up servers by having the testcase live in the bug then we can verify them more accurately and ship releases faster.

ObNit: "test" names might attract the wrong sort, and might conflict with things QA folks already have or will want. If there's ever a plan to fix bug 38862 we could vary the name chosen for that. Or:
  bugzillatc.m.o   //tc for testcase
  bugs#.m.o        // #== 1..N, probably N==3
  test#.bugzilla.m.o  // test OK as BMO subdomain
Note that I know we have DOM bugs for which correct tests would need at least

or equiv (that is, two different subdomains of one domain, and a subdomain of another domain).
Priority: -- → P1
This bug might get more traction in Server Operations...

Assignee: justdave → server-ops
Component: Bugzilla: Other b.m.o Issues → Server Operations
QA Contact: myk → justin
(In reply to comment #8)
> Note that I know we have DOM bugs for which correct tests would need at least

Where are these to point to? ?


Actually, add to that list...
Is there any issue if I preface each of these with bugzilla to avoid any future namespace collisions? 

You mean like  I _think_ that should be OK for what we want.
Added the following:

test1.bugzilla          IN CNAME        bugzilla
test2.bugzilla          IN CNAME        bugzilla
sub1.test1.bugzilla             IN CNAME        bugzilla
sub2.test1.bugzilla             IN CNAME        bugzilla
sub1.test2.bugzilla             IN CNAME        bugzilla

root@boris (/var/named/external/) 6> host is an alias for
Closed: 18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
This doesn't actually work, sorry.  See or even just

Perhaps the web server config also needs tweaking?
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Assignee: server-ops → justdave
OK, these have been added to the apache config as well.
Closed: 18 years ago18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Awesome.  Verified that the testcase now works.  Thanks!
Product: → Graveyard
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.