On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 07:27:21PM -0400, Tom Yu via RT wrote:
> Thanks for the patch...
[snip]
> nalin> @@ -463,6 +463,8 @@
> nalin>          CHECK(p,2);
> nalin>  	rdlen = NTOHSP(p,2);
>  
> nalin> +	CHECK(p,rdlen);
> nalin> +
> 
> Could you please explain why this check for rdlen was added?  It seems
> redundant.

Oh, you're right.  I was trying to guard against missing data for other
RR types, but there's an else block around line 520 that already does
the job.

Thanks,

Nalin