Implementation of DNSSEC10 with new specifications

[vlevigneron]

Purpose

This PR is the implementation of zonemaster/zonemaster#875

Context

fixes issue #992
fixes issue #722 (no longer relevant)

Changes

method Zonemaster::Engine::Test::DNSSEC::dnssec10 complete rewrite
15 new messages tag implemented (no translation yet)
15 old messages removed
Unit tests updated but many missing

How to test this PR

Use one of the following domains to do the tests:

dnssec10-non-existent-domain-name-exists-01.zft-root.rd.nic.fr
dnssec10-non-existent-domain-name-exists-02.zft-root.rd.nic.fr
dnssec10-non-existent-domain-name-exists-03.zft-root.rd.nic.fr
dnssec10-non-existent-domain-name-exists-04.zft-root.rd.nic.fr
dnssec10-non-existent-domain-name-exists-05.zft-root.rd.nic.fr
dnssec11-inconsistent-dnskey.zft-root.rd.nic.fr
dnssec10-inconsistent-nsec-nsec3.zft-root.rd.nic.fr
nic.se
zonemaster.fr

[vlevigneron]

@matsduf message are not yet defined (any proposal are welcomed), but I face a problem with DS10_INCONSISTENT_NSEC_NSEC3. It is not possible to have 2 arguments with same label (ns_ip_list). Should we have 2 messages or 2 labels (to define in https://github.com/zonemaster/zonemaster-engine/blob/master/docs/logentry_args.md).

[matsduf]

@matsduf message are not yet defined (any proposal are welcomed), but I face a problem with DS10_INCONSISTENT_NSEC_NSEC3. It is not possible to have 2 arguments with same label (ns_ip_list). Should we have 2 messages or 2 labels (to define in https://github.com/zonemaster/zonemaster-engine/blob/master/docs/logentry_args.md).

@vlevigneron, the messages should be one to make it clear. My suggestion is the the arguments are called "ns_ip_list_nsec" and "ns_ip_list_nsec3", respectively, to make the distinction. I have discussed this with @mattias-p too. If you agree that it is a good idea, I will create a proposed update to logentry_args that states that such suffix can be added if the same argument is used more than once.

Added 2021-11-05: #997 has been created.

[matsduf]

The specification has also been updated by zonemaster/zonemaster#1008.

[vlevigneron]

@matsduf Do you think we can merge it ?

[matsduf]

Testing v2021.2

LGTM.

I tested available test zones and compared with the output when using dig.

• The test case is not fully covered by test zones.
• Besides the listing in t/Test-dnssec.t there is no documentation on the purpose of the test zones.